THE  LIBRARY 

OF 

THE  UNIVERSITY 
OF  CALIFORNIA 

LOS  ANGELES 


GIFT  OF 
William  Popper 


JUDAISM  — CHRISTIANITY, 


THEIR  AGREEMENTS  AND  DISAGREEMENTS. 


A  Series  of    Friday  Evening    Lectures,    Delivered  at   the    Plum    Street  Temple, 

Cincinnati,   Ohio, 


REV.  DR.  ISAAC  M.  WISE. 


CINCINNATI: 

BLOCK  &  Co.,  PUBLISHERS. 

1883. 


BM 
535 


JUDAISM  AND  CHRISTIANITY. 


THEIR   AGREEMENTS    AND    DISAGREEMENTS. 


I. 
AGREEMENTS. 

SAMUEL  SHARSA  laid  down  the  maxim  :  "B1  p»ND  U'K  W  &WD 
pDKD  rSPP— "  The  truth  is,  that  he  who  reasons  not  does  not  believe ; 
only  he  who  reasons  believes."  This  appears  to  be  true,  if  we  distinguish 
correctly  between  superstition  and  that  faith  which  roots  in  conviction. 
Only  that  settled  conviction  can  be  called  true  belief  which  necessitates  the 
mind  to  acknowledge  the  identity  of  its  ideas  with  the  objects  in  reality, 
as  Moses  Maimonides  defines  it.  Therefore,  the  true  religious  belief,  com- 
monly called  faith,  must  rest  upon  that  conviction  that  our  ideas  of  the  ob- 
jects of  religion,  like  God,  Providence,  immortality,  etc.,  are  truthful  repre- 
sentations of  those,  objects  in  reality.  This  state  of  the  mind  can  be  reached 
by  the  reasoning  process  only. 

This  is  the  standpoint,  ladies  and  gentlemen,  which  prompts  us  to  rea- 
son on  the  religious  beliefs  which  we  or  others  may  entertain.  It  was  laid 
down  not  only  by  Moses  Maimonides,  at  the  very  door  of  his  rabbinical 
code,  and  by  all  his  successors  and  expounders,  but  also  before  him 
by  Bachia  ben  Joseph  Ibn  Bakoda,  the  very  pious  and  orthodox  author 
of  the  Chobath  Hal-lebaboth;  by  Saadia  the  Gaon,  in  his  Emunoth 
Vadeoth;  nay,  by  the  Prophets  and  by  Moses,  who  said,  "  Thou  hast  been 
shown  to  know  that  Jehovah  is  God,  there  is  none  besides  him ;"  also 
"And  thou  shall  know  this  day,  and  reflect  in  thy  heart  that  Jehovah  is 
God  ;  in  heaven  above  and  on  earth  below  there  is  none  besides  him." 

This  impresses  us  with  the  solemn  lesson :  Fear  not  the  progress  of 
science,  dread  not  the  discoveries  of  philosophy,  be  not  terrified  even  by 


91781? 


the  necessity  of  advancing  through  error  to  truth,  for  truth  is  deathless, 
as  God  said  to  Moses,  "  This  is  my  name  forever,  and  this  is  my  memorial 
from  generation  to  generation ;"  and  truth  only  can  be  the  mother  of  true 
religion,  while  falsehood  and  fiction,  however  useful  they  may  appear  for 
the  time  being,  are  invariably  the  progenitors  of  degrading  superstition 
and  fanaticism.  Be  not  alarmed  if  cherished  beliefs  examined  under  the 
light  of  free  thought  appear  untenable,  for  there  is  no  salvation  in  self- 
delusion,  as  there  is  none  in  the  Fata  Morgana  for  the  traveler  in  the  wilder- 
ness. Truth  redeems.  Truth  is  the  prince  of  peace.  We  seek  truth.  If 
priests  maintain  salvation  comes  by  faith,  the  uninquired  and  thoughtless 
faith,  the  belief  in  dogmas,  because  they  are  absurd,  they  can  not  prove  it, 
as  none  has  returned  from  the  realms  of  eternity  to  furnish  them  with  the 
evidence.  It  is  demonstrable,  however,  that  truth  redeems,  it  is  demon- 
strable by  the  peace  and  good-will,  the  prosperity  and  happiness  which 
it  brings  to  man  on  earth. 

It  is  from  this  standpoint  and  with  these  lessons  before  our  eyes  that  we 
open  this  evening  a  course  of  Friday  evening  lectures  on  "Judaism  and 
Christianity ;  Their  Agreements  and  Disagreements,"  with  the  intention 
of  discussing  these  points  thoroughly,  in  as  far  as  we  are  capable  of  doing 
them  justice,  although  to  the  best  of  our  knowledge  no  Jewish  lecturer 
has  as  yet  ventured  to  discuss  these  topics  publicly  and  under  the  light 
of  free  and  independent  thought.  And  why  not?  In  the  first  place  the 
Jews  were  not  permitted  to  criticise  Christianity  or  even  to  defend  and 
expound  publicly  their  own  beliefs.  Those  who  ventured  to  speak  like 
Rabbi  Lipman,  the  author  of  the  Sepher  Nitzachon,  were  slain  or  mal- 
treated. The  books  were  burned  or  stored  away  in  some  monastery  where 
none  could  find  them.  Any  passage  found  in  any  Jewish  book  in  the  least 
offensive  to  the  priestly  taste  was  eradicated  by  the  censor,  or  even  by 
the  Jews  themselves  who  feared  the  wrath  of  their  neighbors.  Nor  were 
the  Christians  permitted  to  speak.  Heretics  and  schismatics  were  burned 
by  the  thousands,  and  many  more  were  crushed  or  suffocated  in  dismal 
dungeons.  Giardano  Bruno  was  not  the  last  victim  of  fanaticism.  He 
was  brought  to  the  stake  and  burned  as  an  obstinate  heretic  in  Rome, 
February  17,  1600,  and  Giardano  Bruno  was  an  independent  reasoner. 
Nor  did  John  Calvir.  do  much  better  in  Geneva  in  persecuting  Castellio 
and  Jerome  Bolsec  with  hundreds  and  thousands  of  others  whom  he 
called  libertines  because  they  would  not  subscribe  to  all  his  doctrines ; 
and  having  Servetus  burned,  October  27,  1553,  as  an  incorrigible  heretic. 
So  free  thought  and  free  speech  had  been  suppressed  for  fifteen  long  cen- 
turies, and  they  are  yet  under  the  ban  of  ostracism  and  under  the  rod 
of  persecution  in  all  countries  except  this  and  France.  No  wonder,  then, 


—  5  — 

that  the  Jew  kept  silent  when  the  Christian  was  not  permitted  to  speak. 
Nor  was  it  advisable  for  the  Jew  to  speak  .overly  loud  of  his  opinions 
among  Jews,  if  they  were  of  the  non-conforming  kind.  Those  who  burned 
the  books  of  Maimonides  and  raged  furiously  against  the  study  of  phi- 
losophy, or  those  who  drove  Uriel  Acosta  to  suicide  and  excommuni- 
cated Baruch  Spinoza,  or  those  who  denounced  and  cursed  Moses  Men- 
delssohn and  his  disciples,  as  in  our  very  days  many  of  these  so-called  re- 
formers were  hated,  persecuted  and  denounced  by  their  bigoted  co-relig- 
ionitts,  did  certainly  not  encourage  free  thought  and  free  speech.  And 
so  the  Jew  was  silent,  although  his  silence  was  misconstrued  to  the  effect 
that  Judaism  had  no  apology  for  its  doctrines  and  no  arguments  against 
its  opponents. 

Thank  Heaven  we  are  in  America,  and  in  Cincinnati,  where  free  thought 
and  free  speech  are  the  birthright  of  every  law-abiding  person.  Speech  and 
arguments  govern  the  community,  and  personal  liberty  is  esteemed  as 
man's  most  precious  boon.  Thank  Heaven  that  we  live  in  an  age  and  a 
country  in  which  bigotry  and  fanaticism  are  subjected  to  the  scepter  of 
justice  and  reason,  and  have  learned  the  art  of  moderation.  Now  and 
here,  it  is  possible  to  discuss  fairly  any  important  subject,  and  none  is  more 
important  than  religion,  which  is  after  all  the  motive  power  of  indi- 
vidual volitions,  and  the  character  of  the  generality.  Now  and  here  it 
is  proper  to  compare  and  review  Judaism  and  Christianity,  their  agree- 
ments and  disagreements,  at  the  electric  light  of  reason  ;  to  criticise  and 
expose  errors  with  the  apparatus  of  logic ;  to  praise  and  recommend, 
whatever  may  be  found  praiseworthy  and  recommendable,  without  preju- 
dice or  fanaticism  ;  to  reconcile  and  unite,  wherever  conciliation  is  admis- 
sible and  unification  possible ;  to  attack  error  and  advance  truth  without 
malice,  scorn  or  any  unnecessary  offense ;  to  contribute  a  man's  share  to 
the  dominion  of  peace  and  good  will  by  a  mutual  better  understanding  of 
our  intentions,  aims  and  objects. 

Whoever  is  afraid  of  the  two-edged  sword  of  truth  and  the  cold  steel  of 
logic,  is  not  expected  to  listen  to  these  lectures.  We  say  the  two-edged 
sword,  and  mean  what  we  say  ;  for  we  will  have  to  cut  into  both  Judaism 
and  Christianity,  as  there  are  old  sores  in  e'ach  system  which  must  be  cut, 
now  or  later,  and  will  be  cut  and  healed  by  the  world's  steady  progress, 
whether  we  recognize  them  or  not.  Whatever  can  not  stand  the  rigid  ap- 
plication of  reason  is  doomed  to  perish.  Whatever  is  in  the  way  of  the 
unity  and  fraternity  of  the  human  family  will  be  overthrown.  Whatever 
is  unkind,  uncharitable,  ungenerous,  intolerant,  illiberal  or  unfree  can  not 
last  much  longer  in  our  country.  There  can  be  no  harm  in  exposing  any 
elements  of  this  kind  at  once  and  radically.  Whoever  can  stand  this 


process  of  purification  is  respectfully  invited  to  aid  and  assist  us  in  our 
search  for  truth.  The  audience  is  respectfully  requested  to  excuse  this 
lengthy  preface.  We  go  now  to  our  subject. 

It  would  be  in  its  place  here  to  give  definitions  of  Judaism  and  Chris- 
tianity, and  I  would  gladly  do  so  if  anybody  could  define  those  generic 
terms  to  the  satisfaction  of  the  majority  of  their  votaries.  That  which  is 
in  a  continuous  state  of  evolution  can  not  be  fixed  or  limited  by  any  def- 
inition. Judaism  always  was  in  a  state  of  evolution,  as  must  be  evident  to 
any  observer  of  large  periods  thereof.  The  Judaism  from  and  after  Moses 
was  not  the  same  as  the  Judaism  from  and  after  Samuel  and  David ; 
nor  was  the  Judaism  of  the  first  Hebrew  Commonwealth  identical  with 
that  of  the  second  Commonwealth ;  so  before  and  after  the  close  of  the 
Talmud;  before  and  after  the  casuists  had  written;  before  and  after 
the  Spanish  school,  and  so  on  to  our  days,  Judaism  changed. 

The  same  precisely  is  the  case  with  Christianity.  From  and  after 
Jesus  and  the  original  Apostles;  from  and  after  Paul  of  Tarsus; 
from  and  after  John  the  Evangelist;  from  and  after  the  Council  of 
Nice,  the  establishment  of  the  Roman  and  Greek  Churches ;  from 
and  after  the  Councils  and  scholasts  of  the  Middle  Ages ;  from  and  after 
the  Reformation — and  so  on  to  our  days,  Christianity  changed  and 
changes  yet,  so  that  every  now  and  then  a  new  sect  springs  into 
existence.  You  can  not  define  that  which  admits  of  no  definition,  to 
cover  the  whole  subject.  At  this  very  moment,  take  the  past  out  of 
the  consideration,  it  is  impossible  to  furnish  an  adequate  definition 
of  either  Judaism  or  Christianity.  You  send  down  to  Longworth 
Street,  where  a  small  congregation  of  Russian  orthodox  Jews  meet, 
and  ask  of  that  body,  as  of  our  friends  over  yonder  in  Lodge  Street, 
a  definition  of  Judaism.  They  let  you  have  it  to  the  best  of  their 
knowledge,  and  you  read  it  to  any  of  our  temple  congregations  here,  or 
in  St.  Louis,  Chicago  or  New  York,  or  elsewhere,  and  you  will  be 
frankly  told  that  is  not  Judaism.  Go  across  the  street  to  the  Roman 
Catholic  prelate,  or  there  to  the  Unitarian  pastor;  ask  our  German 
pastors,  and  then  our  Puritian  preachers,  to  define  Christianity  for  you  ; 
then  compare  notes,  and  you  will  find  that  none  has  given  you  an  exact 
definition  of  Christianity,  because  none  could  do  it  to  the  satisfaction' 
of  all.  There  must  be  something  wrong  in  all  those  systems,  something 
not  in  harmony  with  reason  and  logic,  or  else  the  definitions  must  be 
identical,  as  every  scientist  could  tell  what  is  geometry,  what  is 
chemistry,  what  is  physics,  and  so  on  with  all  the  sciences.  Therefore, 
I  will  not  now  define  what  is  Judaism  or  what  is  Christianity.  I 
must  first  investigate  the  elements  essential  to  either,  and  tbon  define. 


In  some  of  those  essential  elements  Judaism  and  Christianity  agree, 
are  almost  identical ;  in  others,  however,  they  differ.  We  will  review 
first  the  ''  agreements,"  as  one  of  my  excellent  friends  once  advised  me. 
He  said :  "  If  you  should  ever  feel  compelled  to  quarrel  with  any 
neighbor  about  some  disputed  point,  begin  with  the  attempt  of  ascer- 
taining in  what  points  you  agree;  that  matter  settled,  then  speak  of 
the  disputed  point,  and  in  nine  cases  out  of  ten  you  will  be  astonished 
to  discover  that  you  did  not  essentially  disagree  at  all."  Let  us  dis- 
cuss the  '*  agreements  "  first. 

Jew,  Christian  and  Mohammedan  agree  in  the  belief  in  the  exist- 
ence of  one  God,  who  is  the  Author,  Preserver  and  sole  Sovereign  of 
the  universe,  with  its  uncountable  millions  of  individual  beings,  the 
Lord  and  Father  of  man  and  all  other  intelligent  beings,  if  such  exist 
besides  man,  the  Eternal,  Invisible.  Almighty  and  Omnipresent,  of 
whom  Goethe  has  Faust,  in  his  frivolity,  sing — 

"  Who  dares  express  Him  ? 
And  who  confess  Him, 
Saying,  i  do  believe? 
A  man's  heart  bearing, 
What  man  has  the  daring 
To  say  :  I  acknowledge  him 
The  All-enfolder, 
The  All-upholder?" 

Before  Him,  who  is  the  mystery  of  mysteries,  and  yet  the  clearest  of 
all  revelations  reaching  the  human  mind,  the  most  distant  and  the 
nearest,  most  cogitable  and  unknowable,  before  Him,  Jew,  Christian 
and  Mohammedan  stand  in  awe,  feel  Hia  presence,  think  of  His  great- 
ness, praise,  worship  and  glorify  His  holy  name. 

Thus  much  has  been  gained  in  the  world's  progress,  that  all  civilized 
nations  believe  in  the  living  God  of  Israel.  The  atheist  is  neither 
Jew,  Christian  nor  Mohammedan.  The  difference  between  these  three 
faiths  is  not  in  the  substance  of  this  doctrine:  it  is  in  its  accidents. 
They  differ  in  definitions.  The  trinitarian  believes  not  in  three  Gods ; 
his  definition  of  the  one  God  distinguishes  his  faith  from  that  of  other 
monotheists,  and  makes  him  intolerant  toward  them.  Not  what  God  is 
supposed  to  have  revealed  of  himself,  but  what  man  has  added,  is  the 
element  of  disturbance.  As  in  time  of  yore  the  Prophet  exclaimed : 
"  Have  we  not  all  one  Father;  hath  not  one  God  created  us?"  we  may 
repeat  now,  and  admonish  all  the  children  of  the  civilized  nations  in 
the  words  of  another  prophet :  "  Peace,  peace  to  him  who  is  nigh  and  to 
him  who  is  far  off,  saith  Jehovah,  and  1  will  heal  him." 


Again,  Jew,  Christian  and  Mohammedan  believe  alike  that  this 
physical  world  is  of  God's  creation.  He  preceded  it;  He  designed  and 
executed;  He  made  and  shaped  it. 

"  He  said — and  it  was; 

He  commanded — and  there  it  stood." 

The  spirit  is  the  substance  of  all  being,  and  preceded  it;  the  spirit 
only  is  from  eternity  to  eternity ;  the  spirit  is  absolute,  and  all  ma- 
terial things  are  not,  because  their  existence  is  relative,  subject  to 
perpetual  change;  they  are  and  are  not;  they  become  and  perish. 
Thus  all  of  them  agree  upon  the  substantiality  and  omnipotence  of 
the  spirit,  the  accidentality  and  inferiority  of  matter,  which  is  the 
creature  and  the  servant  of  the  Most  High.  Therefore,  they  also 
agree  that  God's  power  and  wisdom  pervade  and  govern  all  things 
in  this  immense  universe.  God's  providence  extends  over  all  his 
creatures,  the  hosts  on  high,  the  sun  and  stars,  and  the  hosts  below, 
man  and  beast,  elephant  or  worm,  cedar  or  fungus,  all,  all  of  them  are 
objects  of  his  care,  provided  for  and  controlled  by  his  wisdom  and 
power.  The  spirit  reigns  and  matter  obeys.  The  Mohammedan  may 
incline  more  to  fatalism  than  some  of  us  do;  not,  indeed,  by  Moham- 
med's teachings,  but  in  consequence  of  his  expounders;  still  all 
maintain  and  all  profess  "Jehovah  reigneth  forever  and  aye,"  as 
did  redeemed  Israel  at  the  Red  Sea. 

Furthermore,  Jew,  Christian  and  Mohammedan  believe  alike  in  the 
spirit  of  man  being  substance  of  the  divine  substance,  with  quali- 
ties of  the  eternal  spirit,  and,  therefore,  immortal  like  the  death- 
less source  from  which  it  flows  and  in  which  it  exists  in  time  and 
eternity,  consciously  or  unconsciously,  in  the  purity  of  holiness  or 
the  brutality  of  sensual  and  carnal  depravity,  at  the  height  of  self- 
consciousness  and  the  blissful  memory  of  goodness,  or  the  twilight 
idiocy  and  the  painful  recollections  of  self-inflicted  evil.  So  the  water 
remains  the  same  crystal  fluid  as  it  is  in  the  spring  in  the  rock,  although 
it  may,  mixed  with  the  mire,  become  Ohio  or  Mississippi  water,  it  is 
water  still.  The  element  (the  substance)  changes  not.  All  of  them  be- 
lieve in  the  essence  and  immortality  of  the  soul,  in  this  or  that  form,  and 
in  some  kind  of  reward  and  punishment,  however  uncharitably  they 
may  exclude  one  another  from  the  kingdom  of  heaven,  and  expel  the 
children  from  the  Father's  house,  in  consequence  of  human  deduc- 
tions and  unreasoning  fanaticism ;  yet  all  believe  the  same  funda- 
mental doctrine  as  a  characteristic  of  human  nature. 

Again,  Jew,  Christian  and  Mohammedan  do  verily  believe  that 
God  revealed  himself  or  his  will  to  Abraham  and  Moses,  to  and 


. A    „ 

through  the  prophets  and  bards  of  Israel;  all  believe  in  the  revela* 
tion  on  Mount  Sinai,  in  this  or  that  form,  so  explained  or  other- 
wise, and  all  believe  more  or  less  in  miracles,  in  'the  natural  or  su- 
pernatural form,  and  all  point  to  them  as  a  species  of  evidence  upon 
which  their  respective  faith  rests.  Therefore  the  question  arises,  If 
they  thus  agree,  why  do  they  thus  disagree?  If  their  beliefs  are  so 
much  alike  in  the  main,  why  do  they  denounce,  hate,  persecute  and 
even  abhor  one  another,  as  history  tells  they  did  and  partly  do 
now?  Why  should  they  not  look  first  and  foremost  upon  those  main 
points,  in  which  they  agree,  and  admonish  one  another  to  peace 
and  good  will,  and  address  to  each  other  the  prophetical  words,  u  Go 
ye,  and  let  us  ascend  the  mountain  of  Jehovah"?  It  is  all  on  account 
of  the  Unfortunate  "  Disagreements,"  which  we  propose  to  discuss  in 
subsequent  lectures.  They  are  the  cause  of  the  misery,  the  numerous 
woes,  the  tears  and  blood,  the  ugly  stains  in  the  history  of  civiliza- 
tion. '  As  to  the  points  of  agreement  and  the  religion  based  upon 
them,  King  David  has  provided  us  (Psalms  xv.)  with  a  splendid  cate- 
chism, which,  we  think,  suffices  to  all  good  men: 

"O  Jehovah,  who  shall  dwell  in  thy  tent,  who  shall  abide  in  thy 
holy  mountain? 

''  He  that  walketh  uprightly,  worketh  righteousness  and  speaketh 
the  truth  in  his  heart;  that  uttereth  no  calumny  with  his  tongue,  doeth 
no  evil  to  his  neighbor,  and  bringeth  no  reproach  on  his  fellow-man, 
in  whose  eyes  the  despicable  is  despised;  he  who  honoreth  those  who 
fear  Jehovah,  and  having  sworn  even  to  his  injury,  changeth  not; 
that  giveth  not  his  money  for  usury,  and  taketh  no  bribe  against  the 
innocent. 

"  He  that  doeth  these  things  shall  not  be  moved  to  eternity." 

Thank  you,  King  David,  for  this  universal  catechism.  Whereas, 
neither  rabbi,  nor  priest,  nor  dervish  can  improve  it,  we  stop  here  and 
keep  our  u  Disagreements"  for  another  lecture. 


II. 

INSPIRATION,  PROPHECY  AND  REVELATION. 

THE  Bible  is  a  great  book,  although  many  critics  say  it  is  not.  The 
world  does  not  agree  with  them.  The  world  changes  and  we  change 
with  it,  still  the  world  did  not  change  in  this  one  point,  as  it  yet  maintains 
that  the  Bible  is  a  great  book.  Vox  populi,  vox  Dei  is  in  Hebrew  *Koj,  HAM- 
MON  KE-KOL  SHADDAi,  and  Cicero's  argument,  based  on  the  common  con- 
sent of  all  nations  (Argumentum  a  consensu  gentium),  must  not  be  taken 
too  lightly,  especially  not  by  a  jurist,  for  all  men  know  more  than  any 
one  man  ;  and  when  we  speak  of  human  reason  we  mean  the  reason  of  hu- 
manity, or,  at  least,  of  that  portion  thereof  that  is  capable  of  reasoning. 
•  Why  does  the  world  ascribe  so  much  importance  to  that  collection  of 
books  called  the  Bible?  Because  one  portion  thereof  is  a  direct  revelation 
from  on  high,  it  is  maintained,  a  momentary  crevice  in  heaven's  impene- 
trable dome,  through  which  mortals  beheld  the  glory  of  the  Majesty  on 
high  ;  and  another  portion  was  written  down  by  men,  divinely  inspired,  for 
truth,  righteousness,  the  salvation  and  happiness  of  man.  How  do  you 
know  that  this  is  so?  reason  asks  the  believing  multitude.  By  the  internal 
evidence  which  the  book  offers  is  one  answer  ;  by  the  uninterrupted  tradi- 
tions and  the  common  consent  of  the  civilized  world  is  the  other.  The 
book  offers  the  most  sublime  lessons,  most  impressively  formulated,  on 
the  nature  and  will  of  God,  the  duty,  dignity  and  hope  of  man,  and  the 
efficient  and  final  causes  of  the  universe  and  the  cosmos  therein,  while 
similar  books  of  other  nations  of  antiquity  contain  but  grains  of  the  uni- 
versal truth  under  a  vast  heap  of  chaff  rejected  by  human  reason.  They 
represent  small  creeks,  and  the  Bible  is  the  broad  stream  of  those  lessons  of 
salvation  which  organize,  civilize,  humanize  and  sanctify  the  human  family. 
This  is  its  internal  evidence.  The  Hebrews,  as  far  as  their  history  reaches, 
together  with  the  Christian  and  Mohammedan  Scriptures  and  nations  from 
their  respective  beginnings  to  this  date  testify  to  the  holiness  and  divinity 
of  the  Bible,  and  have  established  and  conduct  society  on  the  principles  and 
laws  contained  in  that  book,  because  being  of  divine  origin,  they  are  con- 
sidered supreme  and  universal,  and  base  the  duties  and  hopes  of  the  indi- 


pon 


—  11  — 

vidual  man  on  those  very  lessons.  This  is  the  historical  evidence.  Ex- 
cepting the  few  voices  of  skeptics  and  unbelievers  which  reach  us  from  the 
past,  up  to  the  very  door  of  the  nineteenth  century,  the  premises  are  cor- 
rect, the  argument  is  acceptable  and  the  evidence  conclusive  in  as  far  as 
circumstantial  evidence  suffices  to  establish  a  fact. 

Here,  however,  reason  interposes  a  very  important  objection,  which 
is  this :  The  supremacy  and  dignity  of  your  holy  books  rest  upon  the  alle- 
gations of  inspiration,  prophecy  and  revelation.  These  appear  to  be  not 
only  supersensual  but  even  supernatural  manifestations,  which  no  man' 
whose  knowledge  is  only  sensual  and  natural  in  its  foundations  can  estab- 
lish. We  divide  the  question  and  give  the  following  two  answers : 

The  knowledge  which  we  derive  by  our  corporeal  senses  is  the  smallest 
fraction  of  man's  actual  knowledge.  There  is  in  man  a  sentient,  thinking 
and  productive  principle  which  penetrates  far  beyond  the  sphere  of  the 
senses.  Not  only  all  our  purely  religious,  ethical  and  metaphysical  specu- 
lations and  conceptions,  but  also  the  science!,  or  rather  that  principal 
portion  thereof  which  constructs  science  of  the  detached  facts  of  our 
sensual  experience  and  experiments  are  absolutely  supersensual.  As 
absurd  as  it  is  for  any  man  of  sound  sense  to  maintain  that  he  can  believe 
nothing  which  he  could  not  see,  i.  e.,  not  perceive  with  his  senses  and  grasp 
with  his  animal  intellect,  equally  unphilosophical  is  the  allegation  that  su- 
persensual manifestations  can  not  be  proved  by  the  logical  process.  No 
sensible  man  doubts  that  the  sun  is  a  fixed  star  around  which  the  earth, 
with  the  other  planets  and  moons  of  the  system,  revolve,  whatever  the 
Book  of  Joshua  may  assert  to  the  contrary,  and  yet  Copernicus,  Keppler, 
Galileo  and  Newton  did  not  construct  the  evidence  in  support  of  that  su- 
persensual fact  from  sensual  perceptions  and  Observations.  And  yet  nine- 
tenths  of  all  men  know  and  believe  this  fact  by  tradition  only,  by  the  argu- 
mentum  a  consensu  gentium — the  common  consent  of  the  nations — precisely 
in  the  same  manner  as  they  know  that  the  Bible  is  a  divine  book.  Sen- 
sualism as  a  philosophical  basis  is  but  one  side,  and  the  lower  one  only,  of 
the  foundation  of  truth. 

Revelation,  however  one  might  explain  it,  signifying  a  supernatural  com- 
munication to  man  coming  from  God  directly  or  indirectly  by  his  angels 
or  otherwise,  how  could  man,  reasoning  logically,  arrive  at  the  evidence  in 
support  of  such  a  manifestation?  We  say  that  materialism,  lealism  and 
positivism  ;  also  Spinozism,  are  obliged  to  take  the  supernatural  for  granted, 
although  they  can  neither  prove  nor  disprove  it ;  for  they  can  not  close 
their  eyes  to  the  conscience  and  consciousness  of  man,  reason,  freedom, 
ideality,  moral  feeling  and  a3sthetical  taste,  all  of  which  are  inexplicable  by 
all  the  laws,  hypotheses  and  theories  of  and  concerning  matter  and  force; 


—  12  — 

hence  they  are  supernatural  facts  with  all  cf  them,  and  facts  they  are,  not- 
withstanding those  gentlemen's  inability  to  explain  or  prove  them.  They 
must  admit  that  revelation  is  only  one  more  supernatural  fact  in  addition 
to  many  others  which  they  can  not  explain,  prove  or  disprove. 

The  theist,  however,  all  those  who  start  from  the  premises  concerning 
God,  man  and  their  mutual  relation,  which  we  have  laid  down  in  the  first 
lecture  of  this  series,  can  not  deny  the  possibility,  and  is  necessitated  by 
reasoning  from  analogy  to  admit  the  spiritual  raport  between  God  and 
man.  Here  you  etand  in  this  physical  world.  Each  considers  himself  a 
person,  a  being  complete  and  independent,  of  distinct  and  individual  exist- 
ence. And  yet  your  relation' to  this  physical  nature  with  all  its  elements 
and  forces  is  constant  and  continuous.  With  a  thousand  invisible  threads 
you  are  tied  to  this  physical  world  at  large,  and  each  is  a  channel  to  con- 
duct into  you  the  gifts  of  nature  which  you  continually  reciprocate.  You 
affect  and  are  affected  without  rest  or  pause,  you  are  in  this  material  nature 
a  mere  part  thereof  and  in  constant  raport  with  it.  although  you  appear  to 
be  a  complete  and  independent  individual.  "Well,  then,  you  who  believe  in 
the  existence  of  the  one  and  eternal  God,  who  is  omnipotent  and  om- 
nipresent; you  who  believe  in  the  spirit  of  man  and  its  Godlike  qualities, 
by  what  process  of  reasoning  could  you  doubt  the  continuous  spiritual 
raport  of  the  individual  spirit  with  the  universal  spirit,  if  you  must  admit 
the  perpetual  raport  of  individualized  and  cosmic  matter,  when  the  one 
process  is  evidently  as  supernatural  as  the  other?  You  see,  appealing  to 
reason,  there  is  no  cause  why  the  supernatural  manifestations  of  inspira- 
tion, prophecy  and  revelation  should  not  be  accepted  as  facts.  Therefore, 
the  vast  majority  of  men  could  and  did  accept  them,  and  the  most  eminent 
philosophers  of  all  past  centifries,  Plato,  Aristotle  included,  could  expound 
and  advocate  them.  "  I  am  no  better  than  my  ancestor?." 

We  have  now  arrived  at  the  main  object  of  this  lecture,  viz  :  the  consid- 
eration of  these  three  terms  :  Inspiration,  prophecy  and  revelation,  and 
herewith  we  have  also  arrived  at  the  first  point  of  disagreement  in  Judaism 
and  Christianity. 

Inspiration  signifies  to  bring  in  spirit,  viz :  into  any  person  by  an  out- 
ward agency,  and  thus  increase  quantitatively  the  spirit  of  that  person,  giv- 
ing him  more  spirit.  In  this  form,  however,  it  is  a  New  Testament  idea, 
where  the  Holy  Ghost  is  supposed  to  have  come  down  in  a  materialized 
form,  as  a  dove,  upon  Jesus  after  his  baptism,  or  in  the  shape  of  fiery 
tongues,  upon  the  apostle  on  the  Day  of  Pentecost.  The  ancient  Hebrews 
did  not  connect  the  spirit  with  the  idea  of  quantity.  Therefore,  they  had  no 
word  for  inspiration,  as  they  had  no  idea  of  conducting  spirit  into  a  man, 
as  heat,  magnetism  or  electricity  might  be  conducted  into  him.  Nor  is  the 


—  13  — 

expression  Holy  Ghost  (Hebrew  Ruach  hac-Kodesh)  found  anywhere  in  the 
Old  Testament ;  it  is  New  Hebraic,  and  was  coined  by  the  Rabbis,  perhaps 
in  imitation  of  the  terms  used  by  the  early  Christians.  The  Biblical  idea  as 
worded  by  the  later  prophets  especially,  "  And  there  was  upon  me  the 
hand  (or  power)  of  God;''  'WThere  was  upon  me  the  spirit  of  God;" 
"  Then  the  spirit  lifted  me  up,"  and  similar  phrases  express  the  idea  that 
the  spirit  of  the  favored  man  or  woman  was  by  a  divine  influence  ele- 
vated, heightened,  its  latent  energies  developed  into  actuality,  by  the  media- 
tion of  a  burning  bush  in  the  case  of  Mose?,  by  a  vision  of  the  throne  of 
glory  in  the  cases  of  Isaiah  and  Ezekiel,  and  other  occurrences  in  tho  cases 
of  other  prophetical  or  inspired  men.  Here  is  the  idea  of  quality  rather 
than  of  quantity,  the  spirit  of  man  possesses  the  latent  qualities  or  capaci- 
ties to  be  roused  to  a  state  of  inspiration  by  a  combination  of  outward  cir- 
cumstances, which  God  may  have  produced  directly  or  indirectly.  If  that 
state  of  inspiration  was  durable  for  any  length  of  time  in  any  person,  or 
even  on  any  place  which  exercised  such  an  inspiring  influence,  it  was  de- 
scribed, also  by  post-biblical  authorities  as  the  SHEKINAH  dwelling,  resting 
or  abiding  upon  that  person  or  place.  Also  this  term  and  phrase  were 
coined  by  the  Rabbis,  and  de  not  occur  in  the  Old  Testament,  and  still 
later  God  himself  was  called  the  Shekinah,  as  he  was  called  Shamayim, 
"Heaven,"  Ham-mokom,  "  the  place,"  or  also  Rachmana,  "Love  or  the 
Merciful." 

.  You  see,  the  Christian  idea  of  inspiration  is  altogether  supernatural, 
while  the  Jewish  idea  is  natural  and  rational.  The  marvelous  element  in  it 
is  limited  to  the  inborn  capacities  of  the  favored  person  and  the  combination 
of  outward  circumstances  as  the  agency  to  unfold  the  potential  to  actual 
energies.  This  is,  perhaps,  the  cause  of  the  entirely  different  views  held  by 
Jews  and  Christians  concerning  the  divinity  of  the  Bible,  which  we  will 
discuss  some  other  time.  Here  we  will  only  remark  that  all  ancient  phi- 
losophers, Plato  and  Aristotle,  the  Arabian,  Jewish  and  Christian  metaphy- 
sicians of  the  Middle  Ages  accepted  inspiration  as  a  fact,  natural  or  super- 
natural, which  they  attempted  to  analyze  and  explain  psychologically. 
Among  Jews  it  was,  especially  Saadia,  Abraham  Ibn  Daud,  Moses  Maim- 
onides,  with  his  numerous  expounders  and  followers,  who  adhered  to  the 
natural  aspect  of  inspiration,  and  they  succeeded  in  impressing  it  upon  Ju- 
daism. Those  worthies  had  accepted  the  idea  of  Rabbi  Joshua  ben  Chanan- 
iah,  who  in  his  controversy  with  Rabbi  Eliezer  ben  Hyrcan  in  the  Academy 
of  Jamnia  (end  of  the  first  Christian  century)  declared,  and  the  whole  Col- 
lege agreed  with  him,  that  miracles  prove  nothing,  and  "  We  pay  no  atten- 
tion to  the  Bath-kol ; ''  and  this  Bath-kol  was  in  form  and  essence  identical 
with  the  Christian  idea  of  inspiration,  both  being  supernatural  and  con- 


—  14  — 

crete  in  their  manifestations.  Rabbi  Eliezer,  who  adhered  to  supernatural- 
ism,  was  excommunicated  by  the  College,  although  he  was  the  brother-in- 
law  of  Rabban  Gamaliel,  then  Prince  and  Patriarch  in  Israel.  The  prin- 
ciple thus  illustrated  was  accepted  by  Rabbi  Akiba,  who  with  three  of 
his  cotemporaries  went  into  Gnostic  speculations  and  practices  to  obtain 
knowledge  by  inspiration,  and  at  last  came  to  the  conclusion,  "  Thy 
doings  (thine  own)  bring  thee  nearer  (to  the  Deity),  and  thy  doings  remove 
thee  (from  Him);"  which  is  to  say  that  thy  wisdom,  righteousness  and 
holiness  achieve  for  thee  that  victory  over  man's  ignorance  and  wickedness 
which  thou  seekest  in  that  state  of  inspiration. 

The  subjective  evidence  of  divine  inspiration  is  the  irresistible  longing  to 
do  some  great  deed  or  to  utter  some  important  truth  in  the  name  of  God 
and  for  the  benefit  and  blessing  of  man,  especially  when  mankind  stands 
in  need  of  such  deeds  or  such  utterances ;  then  those  needs  are  the  outer 
circumstances  which  attract  and  captivate  the  favored  man's  attention,  en- 
gage and  actuate  his  mind,  and  finally  become  to  him  the  cause  of  inspira- 
tion, if  by  nature  he  is  gifted  with  superior  fancy,  his  intelligence  and 
ethical  character  are  correspondingly  developed  and  perfected,  and  his 
mind  is  directed  to  the  sublime  and  divine,  the  true  and  the  good.  The 
impulse  to  perform  valorous  deeds  for  the  salvation  of  man  in  their  mun- 
dane affairs,  as  recorded  of  Samson,  or  of  Gideon,  Jephthah  and  David 
mark  the  lowest  degree  of  inspiration,  an  inspiration  manifested  in  valorous 
deeds.  A  second  and  higher  degree  of  inspiration  manifests  itself  by  the 
sacred  poet's  inner  desire  to  sing  the  praise  of  the  Almighty,  to  advance 
and  adore  truth  and  righteousness,  to  pour  forth  in  the  form  of  the  beau- 
tiful and  sublime  the  lyric  strains  of  the  soul,  and  sing  of  eternal  tfuth 
and  adoration,  devotion,  resignation,  hope  and  thanksgiving,  as  in  the 
song  of  Moses,  at  the  Red  Sea,  the  song  of  Deborah,  the  Psalms  of  David, 
Asaph,  Jeduthun,  the  Sons  of  Korah,  the  Proverbs  of  Solomon,  the  Phi- 
lo?ophism  of  Job  and  other  productions  of  the  kind. 

The  next  higher  degree  of  inspiration,  according  to  Jewish  conception,  is 
the  lowest  degree  of  prophecy,  which,  like  the  productions  of  prophecy,  is 
again  divided  in  various  degrees,  one  above  the  other,  up  to  Moses,  who  was 
THE  prophet  emphatically,  as  Maimonides  maintains,  while  all  other 
prophets  are  only  called  so  on  account  of  the  homonymy  of  the  term.  This 
opinion  of  Maimonides  is  based  upon  various  ancient  maxims  recorded  in 
the  Talmud,  especially  the  following:  "  All  the  prophets  received  their  in- 
spiration from  Mount  Sinai."  "  None  of  the  prophets  and  prophetesses 
added  to  the  laws  of  Moses  or  abrogated  any  one  thereof."  "  Moses  saw 
(Deity  and  truth)  by  the  clearest  reflector;  the  prophets  saw  by  a  dim  re- 
flector," You  may  add  thereto  the  statements  of  Scriptures  (Numb,  xii, 


-  15- 

5-8;  Deuteronomy  xxxiii.  10-12;  Isaiah  Iv.  10-12)  upon  which  Jesus  based 
his  allegation,  that  he  had  not  come  to  abolish,  but  to  fulfill  the  Law,  not  a 
title  or  iota  of  which  should  fall  to  the  ground ;  simply  because  Moses 
was  THE  prophet  in  the  estimation  of  all  his  prophetical  successors. 

Here  we  have  arrived  at  another  point  of  disagreement  in  Judaism  and 
Christianity,  viz  :  in  the  definition  of  the  ideas  :  What  constitutes  a  prophet? 
what  must  a  man  do  to  deserve  the  acknowledgment  of  man  as  a  divinely 
inspired  messenger?  what  is  the  nature,  the  psychology  of  prophecy? 
Christianity  starting  with  inspiration  from  the  supernatural  standpoint 
must  consistently  maintain  that  the  prophet  is  the  divinely  commissioned 
man  to  a  certain  religious  end,  who  predicts  future  events  and  works  mira- 
cles. Therefore,  both  Jesus  and  his  original  apostles,  also  Paul,  according  to 
statements  of  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  and  a  number  of  primitive  Christians 
prophesied  and  wrought  miracles.  A  similar  idea  is  also  expressed  in  the 
Talmud  Yerushalmi,  where  the  old  maxim,  "  The  wise  man  is  superior  to 
the  prophet,"  is  illustrated  by  a  king  sending  to  his  subjects  two  commis- 
sioners, one  his  servant  and  the  other  his  intimate  friend.  The  docu- 
ment given  to  the  former  tells  the  king's  subjects  that  his  commissioner 
will  prove  them  his  identity  by  the  royal  insignia  which  he  carries  (predic- 
tion and  miracles  in  the  case  of  the  prophet).  The  document  given  to  the 
intimate  friend  (the  savan)  recommends  him  to  the  king's  subjects  on  the 
man's  own  merits,  which  can  be  demonstrated  to  all  men.  Still  it  can  not 
be  denied  that  almost  all  the  prophets  whose  literary  productions  we  possess 
wrought  no  miracles,  and  most  of  their  predictions,  if  not  all  of  them,  point 
to  events  so  near  their  respective  days,  or  at  least  they  might  be  so  understood, 
that  prophesying  appears  to  have  been  no  criterion  for  the  genuine  prophet. 
Therefore,  we  think  it  has  been  set  down  by  Moses  Maimonides  in  the  Rab- 
binical Code  ( Yesodei  hat-  Tkorah,  chapters  viii.  and  x.,  twice  translated 
into  English),  hence  not  as  his  private  opinion,  but  as  the  traditional  doc- 
trine of  the  Hebrews ;  that  neither  miracles  nor  predictions  prove  the 
prophet ;  that  we  do  not  believe  in  Moses  because  he  did  perform  miracles  ; 
and  that  these  were  not  the  criteria  of  any  prophet  after  him.  It  will  be 
necessary  to  discusa  and  understand  this  "  disagreement"  and  its  funda- 
mental principles.  Therefore,  ladies  and  gentlemen,  I  am  sorry,  and  beg 
your  pardon,  that  1  could  not  fully  keep  my  promise  this  evening  to  dis- 
cusb  inspiration,  prophecy  and  revelation,  as  I  do  not  believe  I  am  entitled 
any  longer  to  the  privilege  of  addressing  you,  and  can  only  invite  .you  to 
call  again  next  Friday  evening,  if  you  wish  to  hear  the  rest  of  this  dis- 
course, which  we  now  conclude  with  the  words  of  Elihu  in  the  Book  of  Job, 
"  Verily  it  is  the  spirit  in  the  human  being  and  the  breath  of  the  Almighty 
which  giveth  them  intelligence." 


III. 

PROPHECY,  REVELATION  AND  THE  BIBLE. 

The  prophet,  the  man  of  God,  of  whom  we  read  in  Scriptures,  was 
neither  the  soothsayer,  such  as  figures  in  the  Egyptian  processions  and  the 
Grecian  oracles;  nor  the  legerdem'ainist  of  Arabia  and  India,  who  mum- 
bled magic  spells  and  performed  marvelous  tricks;  he  bad  nothing  in 
common  with  the  exorcist  and  thaumaturgist  of  other  days,  and  had  no 
dealings  with  Satan  and- his  host  of  evil  spirits;  nor  was  he  of  the  same 
kind  with  the  mystics  and  ascetics  who  dwelt  in  sylvan  retreats,  in  dark 
caves  or  obscure  grottoes  fasting,  praying  and  divining;  he  was  entirely 
unlike  the  saints,  monks  and  dervishes  of  later  days ;  he  was  a  man  and  a 
patriot,  the  Inh-Elohim,  "  the  man  of  God,"  concerning  whom  it  was  be- 
lieved, u  Whatever  he  speaketh  will  surely  come  to  pass  "  (I.  Samuel  ix.  6), 
to  whom  people  went ''  To  inquire  of  God  "  (Ibid.),  for  in  olden  days  the 
time  of  extreme  simplicity,  the  Nabi  "  prophet  "  was  also  called  ha-Roeh, 
"  the  seer,"  and  was  supposed  to  unravel  mysteries  also  for  private  indi- 
viduals. (Ibid.)  This,  however,  was  only  exceptionally  the  case.  The 
character  and  office  of  the  prophet  in  Israel  wag  that  of  the  sublime  and 
patriotic  statesman  with  the  broad,  vast  and  generous  conceptions,  who  in 
the  name  of  God  and  his  law,  spoke  to  the  people  or  its  leaders  and 
teachers  words  of  righteousness,  admonitions  of  piety,  lessons  of  wisdom, 
accompanied  by  menaces  of  dire  punishment  to  the  disobedient  and  re- 
bellious, and  promises  of  the  divine  favor  to  the  righteous  and  veracious, 
the  patriotic  and  just,  the  humane  and  generous  benefactors  of  man. 
These  are  the  main  contents  of  all  predictions  recorded  in  the  Book,  as 
made  by  the  prophets,  and  on  this  principle  only  did  they  prophesy  future 
events,  as  means,  not  as  ends,  of  their  mission.  The  legends  of  miracles 
are  very  few  and  far  apart,  after  Moses  and  Joshua,  Elijah"  and  Elisha, 
Daniel  and  his  very  pious  friends,  so  that  the  most  remarkable  prophets, 
Isaiah,  Jeremiah,  Ezekiel  and  the  twelve  Minor  Prophets,  with  only  one 
exception,  wrought  no  miracles  at  all,  and  the  one  or  two  supposed  mira- 
cles wrought  by  Isaiah  (II.  Kings  xx.  7,  11)  must  have  been  strictly  pri- 
vate. Moses  had  already  cautioned  his  people  not  to  attach  any  impor- 


—  17  — 

tance  to  predictions  or  miracles,  where  they  are  intended  to  contradict 
first  principles,  the  dicta  of  reason  (Deuter.  xiii.  2-6;  xviii.  20-22);  there- 
fore, Jewish  theologians  attached  less  importance  to  predictions  and  mira- 
cles than  to  the  dicta  of  reason  and  the  plain  teachings  of  the  Bible. 

The  Hebrew  term  Nabi,  "  prophet  "  is  derived  from  Naba  (see  Fuerst), 
"  to  spout,  to  pour  forth,"  and  signifies  a  man  who  pours  forth  fluent 
speech,  an  eloquent  orator.  The  term  is  used  in  Scriptures  for  both  the 
true  and  the  false  prophet,  the  prophet  of  Jehovah  or  of  Baal  and  Astarte. 
The  oldest  Aramaic  version  extant,  ascribed  to  Jonathan  ben  Uziel  in  the 
century  B.  C.,  renders  (I.  Samuel  x.  5)  the  term  Chebel  Nebiim  (a  band  of 
prophets)  by  Siath  Saphria,  "A  band  of  Scribes"  or  perhaps  "orators," 
which  affords  an  insight  into  the  opinion  of  the  ancient  Hebrews  concern- 
ing the  prophet.  He  was  the  popular  orator,  the  mouthpiece  of  truth  and 
righteousness,  the  personified  free  press  and  free  sp3ech  in  Israel,  under 
the  special  protection  of  God  and  the  Law.  The  form  changed,  the  funda- 
mental idea  remains,  and  is  fundamental  yet  in  the  progress  of  civilization 
and  the  enlightenment  of  nations. 

In  the  Mosaic  dispensation  the  head  of  the  republic  was  to  be  a  prophet, 
or  rather  the  principle  one  of  his  age  (compare  Exodus  xxiii.  20-23  with 
Deuter.  xviii.  15-22),  and  he  was  the  only  human  being  in  the  theocracy 
concerning  whom  the  Law  commands,  "  Ye  shall  hearken  to  him,'1  which 
distinction  was  bestowed  on  neither  priest  nor  prince.  Therefore,  all  heads 
of  the  Hebrew  Republic  down  to  King  Saul  were  called  prophets  by  pos- 
terity, as  the  heroic  Daborah,  baing  at  the  head  of  the  theocracy  is  given 
the  title  in  Scriptures,  "  And  Deborah  was*a  prophetical  woman ;"  and  the 
books  narrating  their  exploits  were  placed  in  that  division  of  the  Bible 
which  is  called  the  Former  Prophets.  After  the  revolution  under  Samuel, 
when  Israel  rejected  the  Mosaic  theocracy,  and  established  the  kingdom, 
the  king,  of  course,  was  at  the  head  of  the  new  theocracy,  and  he  also,  as 
in  the  case  of  Saul,  David  and  Solomon,  was  supposed  to  be  a  prophet. 
Still  the  actual  prophet  remained  the  most  important  and  most  influential 
man  in  the  State,  before  whom  kings  and  high-priests  bowed  "down  with 
reverence,  not  merely  because  they  were  the  men  of  God,  but  because  they 
were  the  men  of  the  people,  the  advocates  of  Law,  and  the  protectors  of  the 
nation's  rights  and  liberties,  the  guardians  of  truth  and  righteousness,  with 
which,  and  for  which,  they  were  inspired.  One  thousand  years  of  history 
elapsed  between  Moses  and  Malachi,  and  during  all  that  time  the  prophet- 
ical voice  resounded  with  might.  With  the  courage  of  the  lion  they  re- 
buked kings  and  warriors,  priests  and  princes,  the  nation  and  her  wicked 
men ;  and  yet  only  two  prophets,  two  in  one  thousand  years,  were  slain  in 


—  18  — 

Judea,  and  in  Israel,  but  once  the  wicked  and  idolatrous  Ahab  and  Jezebel 
persecuted  and  slew  them.  So  it  appears  that  also  the  most  wicked  in  Is- 
rael stood  in  veneration  and  awe  before  the  messengers  of  the  Most  High, 
announcing  to  them  the  oracles  of  the  Living  God.  The  prophet  was  a 
unique]institution  found  among  the  ancient  Hebrews  only. 

\Vho]and_what  were  those  mental  colossuses,  that  their  persons  and  their 
oracles  were  so  sacred  to  their  cotemporuries  and  to  posterity?  Moses 
Maimonides  answered  this  question  most  naturally.  In  harmony  with  the 
philosophy  of  his  age,  as  far  as  he  could  indorse  it,  and  basing  upon  pas- 
sages of  the  Bible  and  rabbinical  writings,  he  gives  us  the  psychology  of  the 
prophet.  He  maintains  that,  like  every  other  genius,  the  prophet  is  born, 
as  it  is  supposed  that  God  said  to  Jeremiah  (i.  5),  for  a  genius  he  is  in  the 
noblest 'sense  of  the  term.  His  capacities  are  inborn,  his  abilities  are  ac- 
quired by  training,  his  oracles  are  the  free  gift  of  God,  in  correspondence 
with  his  natural  capacities  and  acquired  abilities,  which  enable  the  individ- 
ual spirit  to  stand  in  closer  communion  with  the  universal  spirit  than  other 
mortals  can,  and  thus  conceive  verities  and  foresee  events  unknown  to  the 
ordinary. mind.  His  natural  capacities  are,  besides  courage  and  predictive 
power,  a  sound,  normal  and  harmonious  organism.  In  the  first  place  the 
imaginative  power  which  quickly  turns  abstract  ideas  into  living,  moving 
and  plastic  entities,  standing  in  bold  relief,  as  it  were,  before  the  mind's 
eye,  acting  and  speaking  in  the  form  of  reality,  so  that  the  subjective  be- 
comes objective,  and  the  person  sees  and  hears  without  that  which  actually 
occurs  within  himself.  This  organon  to  perceive  conceptions  is  the  com- 
mon criterion  of  genius,  and  depends  for  its  material  on  two  points,  the  ac- 
quired abilities  and  the  outer  circumstances.  With  the  prophet,  Maimon- 
ides maintains  that  the  acquired  abilities  must  be  of  the  highest  intellectual 
and  moral  grades.  His  reasoning  capacities  must  be  developed  by  study 
and  training,  by  science  and  reflection  to  a  clear  and  energetic  reasoning 
power,  so  that  the  association  of  ideas,  the  classification  of  the  homo- 
geneous, and  the  process  of  judgment  be  rapid  and  correct,  so  much  so  that 
he  himself  can  not  observe  the  rapid  progress  from  the  premises  or  antece- 
dents^to  the  conclusions.  His  moral  capacities  must  be  ennobled  and  in- 
vigorated by  steady  exercise  in  the  good  and  the  true,  so  that  his  animal 
instincts  and  passions  be  perfectly  subservient  to  reason,  and  he  can  only 
wish  and  love,  think  and  feel  the  good  and  the  true,  and  all  that  is  wicked, 
false,  low  or  mean  become  to  him  unnatural  and  repulsive.  If  thus  fancy, 
reason  and  morals  are  harmoniously  developed  in  a  man  who  has  over- 
come his  worldly  ambitions,  the  vulgar  strivings,  longings  and  yearn- 
ings of  the  common  man,  and  his  soul  is  stimulated  by  the  one  great  de- 
sire for  truth  and  righteousness,  the  sublime  knowledge  of  God  and  His 


—  19  — 

government,  the  elevation  and  happiness  of  man  ;  he  is  preparing  to  become 
a  prophet,  and  maj  become  one,  if  the  outer  circumstances  do  not'disturb 
him  in  his  work  of  spiritual  elevation,  and  the  concurrence  of  events  do 
not  turn  his  mind  in  other  directions.  So  the  genius  becomes  a  prophet 
after  he  has  risen  gradually  from  the  sphere  of  pure  imagination  to  the 
temple  of  moral  grandeur,  to  the  sunny  height  of  sublime  reason,  to  the 
loftiest  problems  of  the  human  mind,  the  mysteries  of  existence  and  that 
mystery  of  mysteries  which  is  to  lead  man  to  perfection  and  happiness. 
So  the  prophet  is  educated.  This  is  the  analysis  of  his  soul  according  to 
Moses  Maimonides,  whose  thoughts  are  well  grounded  upon  Sacred  Scrip- 
tures and  the  traditions  of  Israel.  Whether  in  that  exalted  state  of  mind 
man  will  receive  any  message  from  on  high,  or  in  our  modern\phrase- 
ology  will  conceive  original  ideas  on  the  truths  which  he  seeks  and  the  sal- 
vation he  desires  to  bring  to  man,  depends  on  the  will  of  God  and  the 
combination  of  outer  circumstances. 

Did  such  men  ever  exist?  If  they  did,  they  will  remain  forever  the 
glory  of  the  human  family.  Poor  creatures  as  we  are,  ingulfed  in  this 
material  world,  ever  troubled  and  vexed  by  a  thousand  small  necessities, 
weighed  down  by  prodigal  instincts  and  creeping  along  like  snails  upon 
the  mire  of  accumulated  passions,  we  can  hardly  think  that  such  men  ever 
existed,  such  giant  natures,  such  seraphic  minds.  Among  us  one  has  the 
fancy,  another  the  reason,  and  alas  !  another  again  the  moral  greatness ;  one 
has  the  partial  means  and  another  the  untoward  desire  to  rise  and  ascend 
the  mountain  of  God ;  and  all,  all  of  us  appear  to  have  become  fractional 
men  with  some  excellencies  and  many  deficiencies. 

We  can,  perhaps,  no  longer  imagine  or  even  think  the  perfect  man  in  the 
fulness  of  his  manhood  and  his  nearness  to  the  Eternal  Deity.  And  yet, 
according  to  the  beliefs  and  traditions  of  Israel  there  were  such  men,  and 
those  men  were  the  prophets ;  and  those  prophets  have  bequeathed  us  the 
grand  legacy  of  the  prophetical  books  contained  in  the  Bible.  Therefore, 
those  books  are  so  much  greater  and  holier  than  other  books  as  their  au- 
thors were  superior  to  all  others  known  to  fame.  Their  nearness  to  the 
Eternal  Deity  is  the  objective  evidence  of  the  truth  of  prophecy.  There 
exists  no  better  species  of  evidence  in  the  world.  The  sons  of  the  house 
must  know  the  father's  will.  Now  look  upon  the  ancient  Hebrew  prophet, 
contemplate  him  from  the  standpoint  of  reason,  scrutinize  him  with  the 
skeptic's  critical  eye,  then  compare  him  with  all  persons  known  to  you  per- 
sonally or  by  tradition ;  and  I  think  you  will  agree  with  me  that  the  prophet 
was  a  man  as  unique  and  distinguished  as  are  the  prophetical  Scriptures 
among  all  other  literary  productions.  And  yet  he  was  only  man  and  no 
more — a  man  with  faults  and  deficiencies,  mortal  like  others ;  and  there 


—  20  — 

was  evidently  nothing  so  supernatural  about  him,  that  it  is  not  in  perfect 
harmony  with  human  reason.  The  only  difficulty  we  might  experience  in 
identifying  the  true  prophet  with  the  natural  man  is  in  our  false  concep- 
tions of  man,  his  ability  and  perfectibility. 

And  yet  neither  the  inspired  bard  nor  the  wisest  of  all  teachers;  neither 
the  holy  seer  nor  the  greatest  of  all  prophets  is  looked  upon  from  the  Jew- 
ish standpoint  as  the  organ  of  revelation.  "  All  the  prophets  received  their 
inspiration  from  Mount  Sinai,"  which  is  to  say  that  the  prophets  merely 
expounded  and  promulgated  the  Sinaic  revelation ;  or  there  was  only  one 
revelation,  which  was  that  from  Mount  Sinai.  All  of  them  spake  like  Moses, 
and  Moses  spake  like  the  expounder  of  the  Sinaic  revelation.  It  is  all  one 
spirit — one  and  the  same  contents.  One  God,  one  truth,  one  and  the  same 
lesson  of  righteousness,  which,  spouting  from  Sinai,  saturate  all  biblical 
books  from  one  end  to  the  other.  There  is  nothing  new  under  the  sun,  not 
even  in  the  Bible.  Its  gold  coins  are  from  the  mines  of  Horeb,  moulded 
and  cast  in  different  forms,  but  always  the  same  rnetal.  If  the  Sinaic  reve- 
lation is  true,  the  whole  must  be  true,  and  requires  no  other  evidence. 

If  in  anywise  the  One  and  Eternal  God  communicated  with  the  people 
of  Israel  through  the  thunders  and  lightnings  of  Sinai,  then  we  know  by 
the  most  convincing  evidence  that  Jehovah  is  God;  in  heaven  above  and 
on  earth  below  there  is  none  besides  him.  We  know  that  this  very  Je- 
hovah is  ''  thy  Elohim,"  the  Creator  and  Preserver  of  the  world ;  the  Leg- 
gislator,  Judge  and  King ;  the  Providence  of  the  human  family,  and  every 
individual  thereof;  the  Almighty  King  "  who  brought  thee  out  of  the  land 
of  Egypt;"  and  that  he  delights  in  justice,  freedom  and  righteousness, 
for  he  redeemed  you  from  the  house  of  bondage,  to  legislate  for  you  and 
point  out  for  you  the  path  of  righteousness  to  national  prosperity  and  hu 
man  happiness.  The  introductory  verse  to  the  Sinaic  revelation  suffices 
not  only  to  silence  all  skepticism  and  to  provide  man  with  the  light  of 
Heaven,  but  it  is  also  all-sufficient  as  the  principle  upon  which  all  moral 
laws  are  based,  all  civilizing,  humanizing  and  sanctifying  institutions  of 
man  can  be  founded,  and,  in  fact,  are  founded  more  or  less,  and  all  hopes 
of  man  can  be  safely  rested ;  for  all  ethical  conceptions  and  all  immor- 
tality speculations  derive  their  existence  from  that  one  verse  of  Scripture. 
If  that  is  true,  then  the  whole  economy  of  the  Bible,  the  entire  code  of 
morals,  the  whole  fabric  of  government,  the  institution  of  worship,  to- 
gether with  all  the  duties  and  hopes  of  man,  as  suggested  therein,  must 
be  true,  for  they  are  all  derived  from  this  axiom,  from  which  they  rise  and 
in  which  they  find  their  evidence.  Therefore  some  rabbis  of  the  Talmud 
maintained  the  first  two  sentences  of  the  Decalogue  all  Israel  heard  di- 
rectly from  the  Almighty,  because  they  contain  all  that  is  necessary  for 


—  21  — 

man  to  know  and  understand  in  order  to  erect  upon  it  the  entirev  structure 
of  morals,  religion,  government  and  prosperity  on  earth,  happiness  and 
glory  in  eternity.  The  one  God,  the  free  man  who  communicates  with  the 
Eternal,  the  one  intelligence  and  love  universal  and  individualized,  the  law 
of  righteousness  as  the  fruit  thereof,  suffice  as  the  postulate  to  what  all 
men  need  to  know  to  fulfill  their  destiny  and  realize  their  hopes  in  time 
and  eternity. 

Then  the  Sinaic  revelation  promulgates  the  categories  of  doctrines  and 
laws,  precepts  finished  and  embodied  in  laws,  categories  covering  the  en- 
tire moral  and  religious  sphere  of  man,  flowing  like  a  stream  from  that 
eternal  source  announced  in  the  first  sentence,  the  perfect  system  in  a  few 
words,  to  which  nothing  could  be  added  and  nothing  taken  away,  as  the 
law  of  the  covenant  between  God  and  Israel,  the  covenant  between  God  and 
man,  all  of  which  is  true  and  unalterable,  if  the  first  sentence  is  true,  viz  : 
"  I,  Jehovah,  am  thy  Elohim  ";  and  all  of  which  is  a  complex  of  ingenious 
air  castles,  if  the  first  sentence  is  fictitious.  If  Israel  heard  the  first  he 
heard  also  the  last,  for  all  is  included  in  the  first  and  all  depends  on  it. 
Therefore  the  economy  of  the  Bible,  looked  upon  from  this  standpoint,  is 
the  following : 

All  divine  revelation  is  contained  in  principle  in  the  Sinaic  revelation, 
and  all  revelation  has  for  its  object  the  instruction  of  man  in  his  duties, 
destiny  and  just  expectations,  to  secure  to  him  the  highest  good,  happiness 
in  time  and  eternity. 

Moses,  who  was  appointed  by  Providence  to  redeem  Israel  from  Egyptian 
bondage,  was  also  divinely  appointed  to  organize  the  covenant  people,  to 
represent  among  men  God's  will  and  government,  and  he  did  organize  it 
by  establishing  immediate  and  prophetic  laws  and  institutions  on  the  Sinaic 
principle  with  special  respect  to  time  and  place,  to  outer  circumstances  and 
traditional  habits  which  could  not  be  eradicated  at  once,  and  to  the  moral 
and  religious  status  of  the  then  civilized  portion  of  the  human  family. 
Every  law  of  Moses,  excepting  only  those  which  were  of  momentary  neces- 
sity, is  the  embodiment  of  a  Sinaic  principle  made  tangible  and  effectual  to 
meet  emergencies  or  regulate  affairs  at  that  time  and  place,  so  that  the 
principle  is  eternal  and  referable  to  the  Sinaic  revelation,  while  the  law  as 
such  is  transitory.  All  new  revelations  which  Moses  is  supposed  to  have 
had  were  of  an  explanatory  nature,  to  him  personally,  to  assist  him  in  the 
organization  of  the  covenant  people  on  the  Sinaic  principles.  (Compare 
Exodus  xxxiv.  27,  28 ;  xiv.  31 ;  xix.  5,  6,  9 ;  xx.  18,  19,  with  Deuteronomy 
iv.  9-14,  35,  36;  v.  1-5,  17-30,  and  parallel  passages.) 

The  prophets  after  Moses  were  the  guardians  and  expounders  of  the  Sinaic 
revelation  in  the  form  of  the  laws  of  Moses  or  in  such  other  forms  as  time 


—  22  — 

and  circumstances  required.  The  Council  of  Seventy  Elders  and  the  priests 
were  the  guardians  of  the  letter  and  the  prophets  of  the  spirit  of  the  di- 
vine law.  Whatever  revelations  they  may  have  had  or  whatever  miracles 
they  are  reported  to  have  wrought  were  auxiliary  only  to  protect,  expound, 
enforce,  apply  and  advocate  the  Sinaic  revelation,  the  eternal  law  under  the 
various  emergencies  and  circumstances.  This  was  their  office,  their  sole 
function,  to  which  they  added  not  and  from  which  they  took  nothing  away. 
The  first  and  the  last  book  of  the  Bible  is  of  the  same  spirit;  every  sen- 
tence of  the  whole  collection  is  explanatory  of  the  Sinaic  revelation.  If 
this  is  true  all  is  true. 

But  here  we  stand  before  a  miracle ;  in  fact,  besides  the  creation  of  the 
world,  the  greatest  and  most  marvelous  of  all  miracles  ever  conceived  by 
the  human  mind.  Is  there,  can  there  be  any  logical  ground  on  which  to  ac- 
cept this  miracle  and  believe  in  it?  Human  reason  revolts  against  the  idea 
ot  miracle.  Are  there  any  rational  grounds  in  existence  to  correct  the 
human  reason  on  this  particular  point? 

Ladies  and  gentlemen,  I  have  attempted  this  evening  to  expound  the 
Jewish  standpoint  as  I  understood  it  in  regard  to  prophecy,  revelation  and 
the  Bible  within  the  bounds  of  reason,  except  this  one  point  of  the  Sinaic 
revelation,  and  on  this  one  point  I  must  politely  beg  you  to  grant  me  exten- 
sion till  Friday  evening  next,  when  I  will  make  the  attempt  to  pay  also 
this  debt. 


IV. 

THE    JEWISH    AND    THE    CHRISTIAN    EVIDENCES    OF    REVE- 
LATION  COMPARED. 

The  spirit  of  the  age,  it  would  appear  to  me,  is  concentrated  in  the  one 
English  word — emancipation.  As  in  the  political  life  of  the  civilized  na- 
tions, so  in  all  other  spheres  and  provinces  of  intellectual  activity  the  Ge- 
nius of  the  Ninteenth  Century  combats  the  power  of  authority  and  seeks 
emancipation.  In  our  country  and  in  the  political  arena  that  combat  be- 
gins with  the  revolution,  triumphs  in  establishing  the  principle  of  freedom 
and  equality,  civil  and  religious  liberty,  rises  gradually  to  the  abolition  of 
slavery,  and  culminates  temporarily  in  the  overthrow  of  bossism.  The 
same  spirit  of  emancipation  rouses  the  European  nations,  and  makes  itself 
felt  up  to  the  very  palace  of  the  Russian  autocmt,  the  Vatican  and  the 
Mosque  of  Mecca,  although  slower  in  its  progress,  and  beset  by  more  ob- 
stacles and  impediments  than  in  our  country.  Science  and  philosophy, 
art,  that  most  slavish  subject  of  antique  models  and  patterns,  yea,  also  art, 
commerce  and  all  forms  of  industry  strive  to  liberate  themselves  from  au- 
thority,'seek  emancipation.  We  must  be  free,  is  the  categorical  imperative 
of  our'age. 

The  idea  of  revelation  is  identical  with  that  of  authority.  Therefore,  the 
consciousness  of  the  time  objects  to  it.  Many  intelligent,  conscientious, 
and  even  religious'men,  believing  in.the  self- sufficiency  of  human  reason,  re 
ject'the  theory  of  revelation.  I  believe,  however,  that  I  have  proved  in  a 
former  lecture  of  this  series  that  this  theory  is  not  contrary  to  reason,  and 
is  in  perfect  harmony  with  undoubted  natural  phenomena;  to  which  I  beg 
leave  to  add  here,  that  in  the  face  of  empiric  facts  all  objections  of  reason 
are  unreasonable,  since  facts  will  not  remodel  themselves  to  correspond 
with  our  ideas,  reason  must  modify  its  decisions  to  identify  its  ideas  with 
the  empiric  facts.  Well,  then  revelation  is  represented  to  us  as  an  empiric 
fact,  which  is  in  nowise  invalidated  by  the  objections  of  our  reason  or  the 
consciousness  of  our  age,  as  the  question  is  not  whether  we  understand  or 
appreciate  it ;  the  only  legitimate  inquiry  could  be,  does  the  historical  tes- 
timony presented  to  us  warrant  the  belief  that  such  an  event  transpired? 

On]the  other  hand  it  must  be  admitted  that  historical  testimony  only  is 


—  24  — 

admissible  in  establishing  a  historical  fact.  Let  us  review  some  of  the  tes- 
timony which  we  must  reject.  In  consideration  of  what  has  been  said  be- 
fore on  the  subject  of  miracles,  it  must  be  self-understood  that  the  testi- 
mony of  miracles  is  no  evidence  of  revelation,  because  in  the  first  place 
there  exists  no  logical  connection  between  the  accident  of  the  miracle  and 
the  substance  of  the  revelation.  If,  for  instance,  any  person  would  maintain 
that  God  revealed  to  him  or  her  that  three  times  three  are  ten,  and,  in  proof 
of  his  divine  mission,  would  cause  the  hills  in  our  vicinity  to  skip  like" 
rams,  many  of  us  might  be  overawed  and  believe,  while  reasoning  men 
would  say  they  knew  not  how  that  man  performed  that  task  and  would 
continue  in  their  belief  that  three  times  three,  are  nine,  as  the  skipping 'of 
the  hills  and  a  mathematical  verity  have  not  the  least  connection  with  one 
another. 

Still  less  weighty  is  the  narrated  miracle ;  even  if  it  was  proved  that  the 
narrator  or  writer  was  an  eye-witness.  Quite  a  number  of  doubts  naturally 
arise  in  the  mind,  and  the  hearer  or  reader  is  apt  to  ask  himself  questions  of 
this  kind  :  Was  it  the  author's  intention  to  report  truth  or  fiction?  Did  he 
write  to  inform  or  to  edify?  If  he  intended  to  report  truth,  did  he  see  arid 
hear  correctly,  was  he  in  a  state  of  mind  and  in  the  position  to  compre- 
hend well  whatever  he  did  see  or  hear?  Did  the  writer  not  amplify  and 
exaggerate,  did  he  not  employ  figurative  and  symbolical  language  to  give 
poetical  ornamentation  to  common  and  natural  events?  Did  he  not  write 
postfestum  from  popular  traditions  colored  by  poetical  fancy?  These  and 
other  questions  of  the  same  nature  render  the  written  or  narrated  miracle 
unfit  and  untoward  as  testimony  to  establish  truth. 

Again,  miracles  must  be  believed,  they  can  never  appeal  to  reason.  Each 
miracle  requires  a  separate  act  of  belief.  Those  who  expect  us  to  believe 
in  revelation  which  is  a  miracle  according  to  that  supernatural  standpoint, 
and  then  want  us  to  believe  another  number  of  miracles  in  order  to  estab- 
lish the  fact  of  revelation,  evidently  ask  too  much  of  the  reasoning  man. 
We  can  more  easily  believe  one  than  a  dozen  miracles,  especially  if  any  one 
suffices  to  prove  the  dominion  of  mind  over  matter,  and  the  one,  as  is  the  case 
in  the  Sinaic  revelation,  conveys  all 'the  instruction  to  the  human  mind 
which  it  needs,  to  understand  the  relation  between  God  and  man,  and  af- 
fords him  a  valid  standard  of  truth  and  righteousness.  Nor  can  we,  by 
the  aid  of  a  thousand  miracles,  do  better  than  believe  that  one  which  we  do 
believe.  It  does  not  improve  the  case. 

The  same  precisely  is  the  case  with  prophecy  or  prediction  and  its  ful- 
fillment. It  has  no  logical  connection  whatever  with  the  substance  of  any 
supposed  revelation.  If  a  man  predicted  one  event  or  ten  and  more,  which 
ally  came  to  pass,  it  is  no  convincing  criterion  that  every  other  state- 


—  25  — 

ment  of  his  must  be  undoubtedly  true,  or  that  God  has  selected  him  as  an 
organ  of  revelation ;  and  besides  this  the  supposed  predictions  are  subject 
to  all  the  doubts  raised  against  miracles. 

The  other  aspect  of  this  point  is  no  less  invalid  as  a  proof  of  revelation. 
To  maintain  that  any  person  must  be,  or  has  been,  the  organon  of  revela- 
tion, because  preceding  prophets  predicted  his  coming,  his  life  and  death, 
is  again  the  same  thing  as  above,  viz  :  to  believe  in  many  miracles  where 
one  suffices.  Each  of  those  predictions  must  have  been  a  miracle.  Be- 
sides, predictions  are  made  in  words  which  must  be  expounded,  expound- 
ers widely  differ  in  opinions,  and  evidently  there  exists  no  final  authority  in 
this  case  to  decide  those  differences ;  hence  it  could  at  no  time  be  said  with 
any  degree  of  certainty  that  the  person  who,  in  the  opinion  of  one  class, 
accidentally  corresponds  to  those  predictions,  was  actually  the  object 
thereof,  or  that  not  a  thousand  or  more  persons  may  exist  hereafter  to 
correspond  as  well,  or  even  better,  to  those  predictions.  '  With  all  those 
doubts  surrounding  the  testimony,  no  impartial  judge  could  admit  them  as 
evidence  to  establish  the  fact  of  revelation,  if  it  be  denied  on  the  ground  of 
reason  which  rejects  revelation,  or  on  the  ground  of  Judaism,  which  main- 
tains the  sufficiency  of  the  Sinaic  revelation.  All  this,  however,  does  not 
prove  that  no  miracles  have  been  wrought,  and  no  events  predicted  by  in- 
spired men.  It  is  absurd  to  reason  against  facts  because  we  can  not  under- 
stand them ;  it  merely  sets  forth  that  one  miracle  can  not  be  proved  by 
others,  every  one  of  which  is  without  proof,  in  fact.  Therefore,  we  must 
come  back  to  the  historical  evidence. 

The  Sinaic  revelation  announces  itself  in  the  sources  as  a  fact  which  trans- 
pired in  broad  daylight  before  the  eyes  of  a  whole  nation  of  men,  women  and 
children.  The  Book  informs  us,  "  And  all  the  people  perceived  the  thun- 
ders and  the  lightnings  and  the  voice  of  the  cornet  and  the  smoking 
mount;  the  people  saw,  were  moved,  and  stood  afar  off."  Also  the  people 
said  to  Moses,  "  Speak  thou  unto  us  and  we  will  listen,  and  let  not  (further) 
God  speak  to  us,  lest  we  die."  So  they  also  said,  "  This  day  have  we 
seen  that  God  speaketh  to  man  and  he  liveth."  Whoever  reads  the  corre- 
sponding chapters  of  Exodus  and  Deuteronomy  must  feel  convinced  that 
the  author  thereof  intended  to  narrate  a  fact  of  which  he  was  an  eye  witness, 
and  this  fact  is  that  all  the  people  heard  the  substance  of  the  revelation , 
and  stood  in  awe  before  the  accompanying  demonstrations.  There  is  no 
attempt  at  poetical  embellishment  or  rhetorical  ornamentation  ;  it  is  fact, 
fact,  fact  which  the  author  intended  to  narrate. 

A  whole  nation  saw  and  heard  the  Sinaic  revelation.  This  is  one  of  the 
main  points,  for  this  never  occurred  again,  neither  before  nor  after  that 

4 


—  26  — 

memorable  event.  The  witnesses  of  all  miraculous  events  recorded  in  the 
Old  and  New  Testaments  were  small  in  number,  and  the  correctness  of  their 
perceptions  and  conceptions  might  justly  be  questioned,  even  if  the  reports 
are  correct.  But  in  this  case  a  nation  is  the  witness,  a  nation  which 
by  preceding  events  had  been  gradually  prepared  to  be  the  recipient  of  a 
revelation  prepared  by  the  ancestral  traditions  and  a  succession  of  affairs 
which  raised  them  from  misery  and  slavery  to  liberty  and  triumph,  and 
roused  them  from  despair  and  stupor  to  the  very  pinnacle  of  enthusiasm 
and  inspiration.  Here  a  supernatural  fact  announces  itself  with  natural 
antecedents,  a  purely  intellectual  fact  with  a  whole  nation  as  its  witness. 
No  other  revelation  in  any  sacred  book  of  Jews,  Christians,  Mohammedans 
or  Heathens  steps  upon  the  stage  of  existence  with  that  force  of  internal 
evidence  as  did  the  Sinaic  revelation.  The  reader  of  those  chapters  of  Scrip- 
tures is  forced  to  declare  the  whole  as  a  piece  of  invention  or  accept  it  as  a 
fact,  no  middle  ground  is  possible.  No  sane  man  can  prove  it  an  invention, 
while  in  favor  of  its  truth  there  are  also  the  following  grounds : 

The  second  point  in  the  historical  argument  is  the  united  testimony  of 
the  whole  Hebrew  people  during  all  the  centuries  after  that  revelation. 
The  Hebrew  people  developed  itself  and  its  institutions,  its  religion  and  its 
government  and  its  code  of  ethics,  its  character  and  its  entire  history  from 
and  upon  that  very  foundation  of  the  Sinaic  re  venation.  Three  thousand 
years  of  a  nation's  life  and  history  are  perhaps  the  most  conclusive  evidence 
to  establish  a  fact,  and  this  evidence  supports  the  Sinaic  revelation.  The 
Hebrews  never  denied,  never  gainsaid,  never  doubted.  The  Bible  is  full  of 
glorifications  of  Sinai,  yea,  the  whole  Bible  is  built  upon  it.  The  Apocry- 
pha and  the  Grecian- Jewish  writings  know  and  acknowledge  it.  The 
Mishna  and  the  Talmud,  the  entire  ancient  Jewish  literature  is  brimful  of 
it.  The  Jewish  metaphysicians  and  philosophers  down  to  Mendelssohn  and 
Steinheim  corrobarate  and  expound  it.  The  most  glorious  minds  of  the 
nation  expounded  and  promulgated  it.  Prophet  and  sage,  philosopher  and 
historian,  reasoner  and  believer  accepted  it;  what  right  has  any  rational 
man  to  doubt  it?  Here  is  the  testimony  of  a  nation  from  the  very  begin- 
ning and  all  the  centuries  of  its  long  history,  who,  from  any  standpoint  of 
reason,  will  gainsay  it?  "Guard  thy  tongue  against  evil  (speech)  and  thy 
lips  from  speaking  deceit." 

That  is  not  all,  however,  the  witnesses  are  still  more  numerous  and  the 
testimony  much  stronger.  The  two  systems  of  Christianity  and  the  Islam 
are  built  upon  the  substance  of  the  Sinaic  revelation  because  it  is  a  fact, 
consequently  all  their  votaries  from  the] very  beginning  to  this  day  acknowl- 
edge it,  and  believe  it,  and  stand  in  awe  before  the  thunders  and  lightnings 
of  Sinai.  The  fundamental  idea  of  right  and  wrong,  truth  and  falsehood^ 


27 

God,  man  and  their  relation,  human  duty,  dignity  and  destiny,  u  What  man 
must  do  to  live  with  them,"  the  guide,  the  chart,  the  compass  for  man  and 
•nations,  among  Jews,  Christians  and  Mohammedans  are  taken  from  the 
Sinaic  revelation  and  based  upon  the  fact  of  revelation.  So  God  declared  we 
should  do,  is  the  fundamental  principle  of  civilization  which  directs  all  and 
to  which  all  conscientious  men,  consciously  or  unconsciously,  appeal. 

Therefore,  while  Jew  and  Mohammedan  contradict  the  special  Christian 
revelation,  and  Jew  and  Christian  deny  the  special  Mohammedan  revela- 
tion, and  the  very  nation  among  whom  Christianity  was  begotten  gainsay 
its  divinity;  all  of  them,  Jew,  Christian  and  Mohammedan,  unanimously 
affirm,  confirm  and  indorse  the  Sinaic  revelation.  No  other  revelation  is 
supported  by  similar  pillars  of  testimony,  none  rests  upon  as  solid  a  histor- 
ical evidence,  none  can  boast  upon  that  argumentum  a  consensu  gentium  as 
the  Sinaic  revelation,  so  that  the  worst  of  all  skeptics,  if  he  reason  correctly, 
and  the  strictest  adherent  to  the  all-sufficiency  of  human  reason  could  only 
come  to  the  conclusion,  if  any  revelation  is  true,  the  Sinaic  revelation  must 
be;  if  this  is  not  all  the  others  are  fabrics  of  falsehood.  But  then  we  would 
have  to  say,  all  men  are  neither  fools  nor  knaves,  all  men  know  more  than 
any  one,  if  all  men  believe  and  have  believed  a  falsehood,  then  all  of  them 
reason  erroneously,  consequently  human  reason  must  be  erroneous,  which 
the  advocates  of  the  all-sufficiency  of  human  reason  could  not  admit  with- 
out gross  self-contradiction.  The  historical  testimony  as  it  is  undoubtedly 
before  us,  confirms  the  fact  of  the  Sinaic  revelation,  and  this  is  the  only 
species  of  evidence  to  establish  a  fact  in  the  consciousness  of  reason. 

Well,  then,  here  is  the  main  point  of  "Agreement  "among  Jews  and  Gen- 
tiles, among  all  religions  and  all  special  forms  of  civilization  in  the  Nine- 
teenth Century.  Starting  from  this  solid  basis,  in  which  reason  and  faith 
concur,  we  ought  to  be  able  to  overcome  our  u  Disagreements  "  in  the  very 
light  and  spirit  of  our  age  and  our  country.  Let  all  good  men  reason  to 
bring  forth  agreement  from  disagreement  and  replace  the  fanatical  and 
fantastical  war  cries  by  salutations  of  peace.  Silence  the  savage  martial 
song  and  sing  the  beautiful  melodies  of  fraternizing  humanity,  that  the 
Psalmist's  benign  vision  be  fulfilled.  "  Jehovah  will  give  might  to  his  peo- 
ple, Jehovah  bless  his  people  with  peace." 


V. 


THE  LAWS  OF  MOSES  AND  THE  LAW  OF  PROGRESS. 

The  progress  of  the  human  family  is  a  law  of  history,  hence  a  revelation  of 
Providence  as  true  and  sacred  as  the  origination  of  the  cosmos,  which  re- 
vealed the  power  and  wisdom  of  the  Maker  of  all  things  in  the  beginning. 
Whoever  counteracts  the  laws  of  nature  is  a  sinner,  whose  punishment  is 
inevitable.  Whoever  rebels  against  the  law  of  history,  and  the  progress  of 
the  human  family  is  such  a  law,  can  be  no  less  a  sinner  against  the  same 
Maker,  Providence,  the  Eternal  God,  who  says,  "  Mine  is  vengeance  and 
recompense."  By  accumulation  of  the  material  progress  is  achieved.  Hence 
when  and  where  the  means  of  preservation  and  promulgation  were  limited, 
the  progress  was  slow,  almost  imperceptible  at  certain  times  and  places. 
These  means  having  grown  to  perfection  almost  by  typography,  the  appli- 
cation of  steam  and  electricity,  the  progress  is  now  so  much  more  marked, 
rapid  and  universal  than  heretofore.  Still  it  is  always  the  same  law  of 
progress  which  underlies  the  history  of  the  race,  enacted  by  the  Creator  of 
man  and  engrossed  on  human  nature. 

It  is  evident,  therefore,  that  no  institution,  no  precept  or  system  of  pre- 
cepts, no  form  of  worship  and  no  code  of  ethics  claiming  to  be  of  divine 
origin,  could  have  the  tendency  of  stopping  or  even  retarding  the  onwafd 
march  of  humanity  from  lower  to  higher  conditions.  Therefore  no  relig- 
ious system  nor  any  form  of  government  which  hinders  mankind  in  its 
natural  progress  could  be  of  divine  origin.  Its  course  bears  the  imprint 
and  historical  evidence  of  its  own  transitory  nature ;  while  that  which  is 
originally  divine  is  eternal. 

If  this  postulate  is  true,  and  all  of  us  feel  instinctively  that  it  must  be, 
while  no  honest  student  of  history  can  gainsay  it,  then  the  question  arises, 
what  about  the  Laws  of  Moses?  If  all  of  them  are  of  direct  divine  origin, 
each  and  all  of  them  must  be  eternal  and  subservient  to  the  progress  of  hu- 
manity. This  is  evidently  not  the  case.  The  Laws  of  Moses  contain  plan  and 
specification  for  the  construction  of  a  sanctuary  and  its  furniture,  built  but 
once  and  then  never  again.  They  advance  minute  prescriptions  of  a  sacri- 
ficial polity,  a  Levitical  priesthood,  their  garments,  performances  and  ob- 
servances, their  required  cleanness  and  the  taxes  and  gifts  of  the  people 


secured  to  them  by  law  ;  all  of  which  were  not  observed  by  the  Hebrews  in 
the  Babylonian  captivity,  although  there  were  among  them  prophets  like 
Ezekiel,  and  have  not  been  observed  by  them  ever  since  the  Romans  under 
Titus  destroyed  the  temple  and  altar  at  Jerusalem,  and  none  of  their  most 
pious  teachers  admonished  them  to  observe  these  laws  outside  of  the  Holy 
Land.  On  the  contrary  those  teachers  maintained  that  to  offer  a  sacrifice 
outside  of  Mount  Moriah  was  a  sin  punishable  with  Kharath  "  to  be  cut  off." 
And  yet  none  can  maintain  that  the  reinstitution  of  the  sacrificial  polity 
would  advance  the  progress  or  any  special  interest  of  humanity. 

Again  the  penal  laws  of  Moses,  capital  punishment  included,  in  course 
of  time  were  radically  changed  and  a  number  of  them  abolished  by  the 
ancient  Hebrews  themselves  and  in  Palestine,  where  they  lived  under  the 
Law  and  were  devoutly  attached  to  it.  Yet  no  philanthropic  jurist  will  main- 
tain that  the  re-enforcement  of  those  penal  laws  would  advance  the  cause 
of  humanity  and  accelerate  the  progress  of  justice,  liberty  and  enlight- 
enment. 

The  same  is  the  case  with  the  laws  concerning  the  Jubilee  and  Sabbath 
years,  together  with  the  right  of  possession  and  personal  freedom  con- 
nected with  them,  as  laid  down  by  Moses,  and  they  are  fundamental  in  his 
policy ;  and  his  democratic  or  theocratic  form  of  government,  which  was 
changed  already  in  the  time  of  Samuel  and  Saul ;  and  quite  a  number  of 
external  observances  which  Jew,  Christian  and  Mohammedan  fail  to  observe. 

Again,  while  the  Deutero-Isaiah  told  his  people  that  as  rain  and  snow 
coming  down  from  heaven  return  not  thither  before  they  have  accomplished 
their  object  in  enlivening,  fructifying  and  blessing  the  earth  and  the  off- 
spring of  her  lap,  "  So,  even  so,  shall  be  my  word  which  goeth  forth  from 
my  mouth ;  it  shall  not  return  empty  to  me,  unless  it  hath  done  what  I  de- 
sire, and  hath  caused  to  prosper  as  I  sent  it."  (Isaiah  Iv.  10,  11.)  While 
the  last  of  the  prophets,  Malachi,  admonished  his  people,  "  Remember  ye 
the  law  of  Moses  my  servant  which  I  commanded  unto  him  in  Horeb" ; 
and  Jesus  of  Nazareth  is  reported  to  have  said  that  not  a  tittle  nor  an  iota  of 
the  Law  should  remain  unfulfilled,  that  he  had  not  come  to  abolish  but  to  ful- 
fill the  Law ;  and  according  to  his  biographers  he  did  obey  and  practice  the 
Laws  of  Moses  and  even  those  of  the  Pharisees.  We  find,  on  the  other  hand, 
that  the  Hebrews  in  the  Babylonian  captivity  did  not  observe  the  whole  law  ; 
that  even  Ezra  and  Nehemiah  changed  some  and  abolished  other  provisions  of 
the  Law;  that  the  ancient  expounders  thereof  established  the  rules,  (1)  that 
commendatory  laws  depending  in  practice  upon  a  fixed  time  are  not  ob- 
ligatory upon  woman;  and  (2)  that  all  l»ws  depending  in  practice  upon  the 
locality  or  soil  of  Palestine  are  obligatory  upon  none  outside  thereof; 
and  Paul  of  Tarsus,  on  the  same  principle,  declared  the  Law  abrogated  for 


-SO- 

all  his  converts  who  resided  outside  of  Palestine,  as  he  was  acknowledged 
merely  as  the  Apostle  to  the  Gentiles,  hence  those  living  outside  of  Pal- 
estine. And  now  there  is  a  Babylonian  confusion  among  Jews  and  Gen- 
tiles, all  of  them  acting  without  a  principle  in  regard  to  the  laws  of  Moses. 
Now  they  tell  us  that  you  must  do  this,  or  you  must  not  do  that,  for  so  God 
commanded  through  Moses  ;  and  the  next  moment  they  do  as  they  please, 
as  if  a  Moses  or  a  Law  of  Moses  had  never  existed.  They  speak  of  the  di- 
vinity of  the  Law,  or  even  the  divinity  of  the  Law,  the  Prophets  and 
the  Gospel,  and  eat  blood  and  the  flesh  of  the  swine,  cut  short  the 
hairs  of  their  heads  and  shave  their  beards,  wear  garments  of  linen 
and  woolen  mixed,  pray  to  Jesus  and  make  Sabbath  laws  for  Sunday, 
as  though  there  were  no  such  book  in  existence  as  the  Bible.  There 
is  an  utter  confusion  with  a  perfect  absence  of  principle  in  this  matter, 
and  nobody  can  tell  why  or  wherefore.  And  yet  it  can  not  be  denied  that 
the  word  of  God  must  be  eternal.  No  righteous  man  must  live  and  act 
contrary  to  the  revealed  will  of  God.  Revelation  can  not  be  changed  by 
revelation.  "  God  is  no  man  that  he  should  lie,  nor  the  son  of  man  that  he 
should  repent."  Eternity  is  the  criterion  of  the  revealed.  Nor  can  it  be  denied 
that  there  are  laws  in  the  code  of  Moses  which  the  progress  of  humanity,  the 
progress  of  ages,  of  necessity,  did  change  and  they  could  not  be  enforced 
again.  And  it  must  be  admitted  that  one  of  the  objects  of  the  Sinaic  revela- 
tion was  that  the  people  should  believe  in  Moses.  At  the  very  threshold  of 
the  history  of  revelation  Moses  objected,  "  And  they  will  not  believe  in  rne," 
and  God  assured  him  they  would.  At  the  Red  Sea  it  is  stated  particularly, 
"  And  they  believed  in  Jehovah  and  Moses,  His  servant."  But  this  belief, 
produced  by  miracle,  says  Mosefe  Maimonides,  was  infirm  and  untenable ; 
therefore  God  says  again  to  Moses, "  Behold,  I  come  to  thee  in  the  thick  cloud, 
that  the  people  hear  when  I  speak  unto  thee,  and  they  shall  believe  also  in 
thee  forever."  And  it  appears  his  contemporaries  did,  when  after  the  reve- 
lation on  Sinai  they  said,  "  Speak  thou  to  us  and  we  will  hearken,  but  let 
not  God  speak  to  us,  lest  we  die ;"  and  posterity  testified,  "  And  there  did 
not  arise  a  prophet  in  Israel  like  Moses,  whom  God  instructed  face  to  face." 
Here  is  evidently  a  dilemma  for  the  conscientious  man  who  seeks  a  firm 
standpoint  in  the  word  of  God.  He  feels  the  necessity  of  being  an  honest 
and  upright  man,  a  child  of  the  living  God  in  time  and  eternity.  He 
wants  certainty  in  all  matters  of  rectitude  and  righteousness,  certainty  for 
his  hopes  and  expectations,  certainty  to  satisfy  his  conscience ;  and  yet  he 
dare  not  rebel  against  the  law  of  progress,  he  can  not  change  the  past 
events  of  history  which  influenced  him  and  society  to  be  as  they  are.  This 
inquiry  is  certainly  of  paramount  importance  to  all  good  men,  all  who  de- 
sire to  be  right  with  God  and  man,  to  all  who  are  not  foolish  enough  to  be- 


—  31  — 

lieve  that  "  my  individual  reason  and  conscience  suffice  to  guide  me  heav- 
ward,  and  to  form  my  character  according  to  the  law  of  God."  Who  shall 
give  us  a  decisive  answer  to  this  query?  Where  is  the  authority  upon 
which  we  could  safely  rely  in  this  point?  I  think  the  best  authority  on  this 
point  must  be  Moses  himself.  Like  every  wise  legislator  he  ought  to  point 
out  to  us  which  of  his  laws  were  intended  for  all  generations  and  are  uni- 
versal, and  which  of  them  were  temporary  and  local  or  tribal  only,  when 
and  how  the  latter  might  be  amended  or  repealed  in  the  progress  of  ages. 
Let  us  see. 

The  Sinaic  revelation  with  its  universal  precepts  and  categories  of  the 
moral  law  announces  itself  as  THE  Law  of  the  Covenant  between  God  and 
Israel,  hence  between  God  and  all  human  beings  who  are  of  Israel  in  spirit 
and  practice.  This  is  certainly  the  sense  of  the  5th  and  6th  verses  of 
Exodus  xix.  If  you  will  do  as  I  command,  says  God  to  Israel,  you  shall 
be  to  me  a  peculiar  people,  a  select  nation  for  the  education  of  the  human 
family,  "  For  mine  is  the  whole  earth,"  says  the  divine  message,  which  is 
the  home  of  God's  children  all.  And  then  again  God  said  to  Moses,  to 
writedown  THESE  WOKDS,  upon  which  depend  the  covenant  between  him 
and  Israel ;  "  And  he  did  write  upon  the  tables  the  words  of  the  covenant, 
the  ten  words,"  the  Decalogue.  (Exodus  xxxiv.  27,  28.)  And  again,  in  the 
last  days  of  his  life,  when  the  hoary  redeemer  and  father  of  his  nation  re- 
viewed the  past  and  admonished  them  to  obey  God's  Law  in  the  future, 
that  they  may  live  and  prosper,  and  referring  again  to  the  glorious  event  of 
the  Sinaic  revelation  and  the  covenant,  he  tells  them  again  almost  in  the 
same  words,  "  And  he  told  you  his  covenant,  what  he  commanded  you  to 
do,  the  ten  words;  and  he  wrote  them  upon  two  tables  of  stone."  (Deut.  iv. 
13.)  It  is  concerning  the  substance  of  the  Sinaic  revelation  that  all  the 
people  unanimously  exclaimed,  "  Whatever  God  hath  said,  we  will  do" 
(Exodus  xix.  8),  and  concerning  the  ordinances  added  by  Moses  they 
added  to  the  above,  "And  we  will  hearken."  (Ibid.  xxiv.  7.)  No  pen 
could  express  an  author's  intention  clearer,  more  distinct,  and  more  pre- 
cise than  the  pen  of  Moses  placed  before  posterity  the  great  facts,  that 
God's  covenant  with  Israel,  hence  His  universal  and  eternal  covenant  with 
man,  that  covenant  of  the  divine  love  which  the  Father  makes  with  His 
children,  of  elevation,  redemption  and  salvation,  depends  on  no  other  law, 
precept,  doctrine,  reasoning  or  revelation,  besides  the  substance  of  the  Si- 
naic revelation.  As  perspicuously  as  words  can  express  thoughts,  he  tells 
his  people,  as  long  as  you  will  obey  and  do  that  which  God  has  taught  you 
in  that  Sinaic  revelation,  of  which  the  Decalogue  is  the  briefest  abstract 
which  could  be  made,  so  long  shall  you  be  God's  people,  the  children 
of  the  house,  the  educators  of  mankind,  the  unifying  element  of  the  human 


—  32  — 

race  upon  the  eternal  constitution  of  righteousness  and  under  the  glorious 
dome  of  Heaven's  truth  and  the  Father's  love.  The  covenant  between 
God  and  man,  this  is  the  clear  sense  of  Scriptures,  depends  on  God's  Law 
and  man's  obedience  to  the  best  of  hid  knowledge.  The  righteous  man  is 
the  child  of  God,  and  God's  Law  defines  in  a  few  words  the  signification  of 
that  most  important  term,  by  which  man  rises  to  the  height  of  perfection 
and  eternal  life,  and  the  human  family  is  united  and  fraternized  to  pros- 
perity and  happiness. 

If  this  is  so,  the  question  arises,  where  are  the  glory  and  greatness  of  Mo- 
ses whom  God  instructed  face  to  face?  Where  are  the  greatness,  useful- 
ness and  necessity  of  the  laws  of  Moses?  We  answer,  Moses  would  be  great 
and  glorious  enough,  if  he  was  only  the  redeemer  of  Israel,  the  first  success- 
ful apostle  of  liberty  and  human  rights,  and  the  organ  of  divine  revelation, 
the  first  bearer  and  exponent  oi'  that  redeeming  truth  which  elevates  man 
to  a  child  of  God.  But  he  was  more  than  that,  he  was  the  greatest  legis- 
lator and  statesman  in  history,  whose  legislation  and  political  creation  out- 
lasted all  centuries  and  all  revolutions  of  the  past.  He  bequeathed  to 
posterity  the  most  wonderful  five-act  drama  in  the  five  books  of  Moses, 
the  most  colossal  and  indestructible  monument  in  the  immortal  Hebrew 
people  and  most  lasting  influence  upon  the  legislation  of  the  civilized  world. 

Critics  who  find  ever  as  many  mistakes  and  shortcomings  in  Moses  are 
either  too  unwise  or  too  uncharitable  to  judge  a  great  statesman,  whose 
object  of  existence  is  concentrated  in  the  problem  which  he  solves.  The 
problem  which  Moses  solved  was  immense.  He  moved  a  whole  nation 
from  their  homes  to  the  wilderness,  removed  from  the  necks  of  the  multitude 
the  shackels  of  slavery,  organized  out  of  that  material  an  ideal  nation  to 
outlast  all  others,  and  did  all  that  not  only  in  direct  opposition  to  the 
fundamental  conceptions  and  domineering  institutions  of  Egypt  and  the 
most  advanced  nations  of  the  age,  but  on  the  eternal  principles  of  human 
rights  and  liberty,  justice,  equality,  pure  ethics  and  religion,  on  the  very 
precepts  and  laws  of  the  Sinaic  revelation.  No  wonder  that  he  was 
obliged  to  tolerate  many  an  inherited  evil  and  subject  it  to  the  control  of 
law,  to  be  gradually  eradicated,  and  was  under  the  dire  necessity  of  doing 
things  which,  under  other  circumstance-*,  would  appear  unjust  and  con- 
trary to  his  own  laws.  Such  a  statesman,  the  master  mind  of  such  a  gigan- 
tic enterprise  must  not  be  judged  like  other  men  or  legislators. 

The  mystery  of  the  Mosaic  legislation  is  in  the  point  that  he  realized  and 
embodied  the  precepts  and  laws  of  the  Sinaic  revelation  in  the  laws,  in- 
stitutions and  organism  of  a  nation,  under  the  influence  of  circumstances 
over  which  he  had  no  control,  to  be  placed  in  a  country  which  had  to  be 
conquered  by  the  force  of  arms,  and  to  maintain  there  its  independence  sur- 


—  33  — 

rounded  by  nations  of  entirely  different  and  hostile  conceptions,  habits, 
beliefs,  forms  of  government,  religion  and  ethics.  That  was  his  great  work, 
which  he  accomplished  under  the  direction  and  with  the  aid  of  the  Al- 
mighty, the  governing  power  and  reason  of  the  universe,  to  whom  he  stood 
as  much  nearer  than  other  men,  nearer  even  than  all  the  other  prophets,  as 
the  man  above  the  storm-clouds  on  the  top  of  Mount  Blanc  stands  higher 
and  sees  clearer  than  the  man  groping  about  in  the  mists  of  the  valley. 

Every  law  of  Moses  incarnates  a  Sinaic  precept  and  bases  upon  a  Sinaic 
law,  reducing  it  to  practice  under  the  peculiar  circumstances  to  be  con- 
trolled by  law.  Precisely  the  same  is  the  case  with  all  his  institutions.  So 
he  himself  informs  us  more  than  once.  As,  for  instance,  speaking  of  the 
revelation  and  its  substance,  he  continues,  •'  And  God  commanded  me  at 
that  time  to  teach  you  ordinances  and  statutes,  that  you  do  them  in  the 
land,  to  which  you  pass  over  to  possess  it."  (Deut.  iv.  14.)  He  only  claims 
to  have  made  ordinances  and  statutes  on  the  underlying  precepts  and  laws 
from  Sinai,  to  be  observed  in  that  land  and  nowhere  else.  He  was  too 
meek  and  too  wise  a  man  to  presume  that  his  ordinances  and  statutes 
should  remain  unchanged,  when  the  circumstances  always  change.  There- 
fore he  established  an  authority,  a  supreme  council  to  expound,  extend, 
amend  and  change  laws  (Deut.  xvii.  8-13),  and  told  his  people  to  do  as  that 
supreme  council  may  decide  or  ordain.  The  underlying  principles  of  the 
Mosaic  law  are  eternal,  they  are  of  the  precepts  and  laws  revealed  on  Mount 
Sinai ;  the  law,  any  law,  can  be  no  more  than  the  temporary  incarnation  of 
a  principle,  to  meet,  direct  and  control  temporary  circumstances  and 
emergencies.  The  Mosaic  law  made  the  universal  substance  of  the  revela- 
tion practical  and  national,  but  it  did  not  place  itself  in  opposition  to  the 
eternal  law  of  progress ;  on  the  contrary  it  acknowledges  this  universal  law 
of  Providence  and  modulates  itself  accordingly.  We  still  believe  in  Moses 
and  his  divine  authority,  as  far  as  he  claims  it. 

Therefore  it  is  the  duty  of  every  conscientious  man  to  know  and  under- 
stand the  Sinaic  revelation  first,  then  the  substance  and  spirit  of  the  Mosaic 
laws,  and  especially  their  underlying  principles  and  precepts,  to  be  guided  by 
them  in  a  life  of  righteousness  and  of  preparation  for  life  eternal.  We  can 
not  do  more  than  this.  We  are  not  expected  to  do  better.  In  this  point,  we 
think,  Jew  and  Gentile  might  agree,  and  reason  confirms  it.  But  here  quite  a 
number  of  questions  arise  in  regard  to  the  practice  and  the  proper  authority  to 
expound  the  law,  which,  our  time  being  over,  we  can  not  discuss  this  even- 
ing, but  I  promise  to  take  them  up  one  after  the  other  in  the  next  following 
lectures.  As  a  general  rule  let  us  understand  that  revelation,  like  creation, 
like  the  work  of  genius,  bursts  into  existence  suddenly  and  completely. 


—  34  — 

Evolution  can  only  succeed  it,  development  and  practical  application  can 
only  follow  it.  "Once  God  hath  spoken  (although),  twice  have  I  heard 
it."  "  It  was  a  great  voice,  and  it  continued  not,"  it  was  never  repeated. 
Since  then  reason  and  conscience  are  the  two  Cherubim  above  the  ark, 
from  between  which  we  hear  the  benign  voice  of  the  Eternal  God. 


VI. 


THE  HIGHEST  AUTHORITY  AFTER  REVELATION. 

Although  it  must  be  admitted  that  this  age  of  emancipation  combals 
against  authority,  yet  it  can  not  be  denied  that  we  are  always  guided 
and  governed  by  it;  the  authority  of  persons,  books,  institutions,  inherited 
or  acquired  habits  and  passions,  which  we  consider  superior  to  ourselves  or 
we  consider  ourselves  inferior  to  them.  The  child  is  led  by  the  authority 
of  parents,  nurses,  tutors  and  older  companions.  The  school-boy  believes 
in  his  text-books,  and  many  remain  school-boys  all  their  life-time.  With 
all  our  pride  and  self-esteem  we  accept  the  best  part  of  our  knowledge  upon 
the  authority  of  others.  As  a  general  thing  we  believe  and  know  that 
which  others  have  imposed  upon  us,  and  like  best  to  do  that  to  which  others 
force  us  most  gently,  by  authority  after  all. 

There  are  certain  forms  of  authority  which  can  never  be  overcome  suc- 
cessfully. For  instance,  the  authority  of  reason  imperiously  demands  sub- 
mission. Whatever  human  reason  appreciates  as  true  and  good,  useful  and 
advantageous,  will  at  last  be  modulated  as  law  or  laws  and  govern  you,  me 
and  all,  whatever  time  it  may  take  the  logical  element  to  overcome  and 
overthrow  its  illogical  antagonist. 

So  we  will  never  be  able  to  overcome  the  authority  of  society  over  the  in- 
dividual. Any  one  must  submit  to  many,  as  many  know  better  than  one, 
and  none  can  step  out  entirely  of  the  magic  circle  of  society.  That  sup- 
position that  one  may  be  right  and  all  the  world  about  him  wrong,  is  a 
hypothesis  similar  to  the  missing  link  in  Darwinism,  which  never  had  ex- 
istence in  reality.  Man  at  best  is  a  clear  focus,  in  which  the  latent  thoughts 
of  his  time  converge  and  are  reflected  in  acceptable  words  and  deeds.  It 
is  only  an  inch  or  two  that  any  man,  with  the  exception  of  rare  genius, 
overtowers  the  society  in  which  he  lives.  Lower  your  sails,  top-lofty  demi- 
gods. Again,  the  method  has  not  yet  been  discovered  to  throw  off  the  au- 
thority of  our  own  making.  We  consider  it  the  mildest  form,  which  it  is 
not  always,  and  submit  to  it  with  good  grace.  Here,  then,  are  three  differ- 
ent forms  of  authority,  from  which  man  can  not  emancipate  himself,  hence 
he  must  regulate  them  and  shape  himself  to  suit  these  three  despots. 


—  36  - 

The  authority  of  our  own  making,  made  concrete  among  us  by  a  nost  of 
executive,  legislative  and  judiciary  officers,  elected  or  appointed  directly  or 
indirectly,   as  the   case  may  be,  represents  the  authority  of  society  and 
is  identical  with  it ;  hence  in  the  main  the  two  authorities  could  be  counted 
as  one  only. 

The  questions,  how  this  authority  must  be  managed  to  be  least  oppres- 
sive to  the  individual  or  to  minorities,  and  how  much  of  his  natural  right 
the  individual  must  relinquish  tr  that  authority,  are  as  old  as  society,  and 
have  been  practically  solved  by  the  various  forms  of  government  and  the 
huge  library  of  laws  which  are  the  bane  of  the  law-student's  existence.  The 
debates  over  these  questions  form  the  substance  of  history,  and  were  the 
primary  causes  of  oppression  and  despotism  now,  of  revolts  and  revolutions 
then,  of  periods  of  satisfaction  and  much  longer  intervals  of  dissatisfaction, 
until  at  the  eleventh  hour  of  the  eighteenth  century  we  have  come  to  the 
conclusion,  that  the  questions  must  be  solved  on  three  principles,  viz,  the 
representative  form  of  government,  decentralization  of  power,  and  the  ap- 
pointment of  rulers  by  those  who  are  to  be  ruled  by  them.  It  is  the  mild- 
est form  of  coercion,  forcing  the  individual  most  gently  to  submit  to  the 
authority  of  society,  and  is,  therefore,  most  acceptable  to  him. 

If  this  is  the  most  proper  form  of  government — and  the  most  advanced 
nations,  together  with  the  most  enlightened  and  philanthropic  individuals 
of  all  other  nations,  avow  that  it  is — then  in  this  one  important  point  Scrip- 
ture is  being  fulfilled,  when  God  said  to  Moses,  "  And  also  in  thee  they 
shall  believe  forever."  It  was  Moses,  the  man  Moses,  who  first  proclaimed 
liberty  and  equality  as  the  divine  right  of  man,  and  God's  justice  as  the 
only  crown  and  scepter  of  nations,  "  For  justice  is  God's."  It  was  that 
same  man  Moses  who,  for  the  first  time  in  history,  laid  down  tho?e  three 
principles  of  human  government,  and  reared  upon  them  the  structure  of 
the  Hebrew  State,  to  become  in  proper  time  the  ideal  and  model  of  nations. 
Please  take  up  once  more  your  Bible,  read  that  old,  old  Thorah  again,  and 
you  will,  perhaps,  be  astonished  to  find  in  it  those  very  principles  which, 
after  centuries  of  disobedience,  misery,  bloodshed  and  heaven-defying 
wrongs,  we  have  been  forced  to  acknowledge  as  the  salvation  of  man  on 
earth.  Right  at  the  threshold  Moses  informs  us  that  God,  making  His  cov- 
enant with  Abraham,  promised  him  the  land  of  Canaan,  the  government  of 
God,  and  the  nation  compossd  of  nations,  to  descend  from  him.  Thou 
shalt  be  Ab  Hamon  Goyim,  "  the  father  6f  a  multitude  of  nations,"  which 
is  explained  afterward  by  Kehal  Goyim,  "  a  congregation  of  nations"  (Gen. 
xvii.  4;  xxviii.  3;  xlviii.  4),  was  God's  promise  to  Abraham,  which  can 
only  signify  a  nation  composed  of  nations,  an  E  pluribus  unum.  On  this 
principle  of  decentralization  the  blessing  or  last  will  of  Jacob  (Genesis 


-37  - 

xlix.)  establishes  the  twelve  tribes  organization,  which  was  faithfully 
maintained  in  Goshen.  On  this  fundamental  fact  of  twelve  independent 
tribes  united  in  one  sovereignty  Moses  constructed  the  Hebrew  State;  and 
so  the  universal  republic  will  be  constructed,  when  the  long  and  bloody  war 
in  the  human  family  shall  be  ended,  and  peace  established  and  secured. 

Then  again  Moses  informs  us  (Numbers  xi.  11  to  25)  that  God  told  him 
to  organize  the  Council  of  Seventy  Elders,  to  introduce  the  representative 
form  of  government  also  in  the  whole  nation,  as  it  did  exist  among  the  in- 
dividual tribes ;  and  he  did  so,  and  made  it  permanent  (Deut.  xvii.  8  to  13), 
and  reared  his  system  of  government  on  it,  so  that,  with  the  exception  of 
times  of  rebellion  by  the  people  or  its  kings,  there  always  existed  a  supreme 
representative  body  in  Israel  under  different  names,  as  the  Council  of 
EMers,  the  Great  Synod,  the  Law  Court  of  the  High-priests,  the  Law  Court 
of  the  Asmoneans.  the  Sanhedrin,  the  Great  Assembly  called  Va'ad  hag- 
Gadol  and  such  other  names ;  so  that  the  rabbis  of  the  Talmud  came  to 
the  conclusion  that  the  commandment  to  have  a  Sanhedrin  is  always 
obligatory  on  Israel  in  Palestine  and  outside  thereof.  (See  Sanhedrin  in 
Yad  ha-Chasakah.) 

And  again  that  man  Moses  commanded  his  people  (Deut.  xvi.  18), 
"  Judges  and  bailiffs  shalt  thou  give  unto  thee  in  all  thy  gates  which  the 
Lord  thy  God  will  give  thee,  for  thy  tribes,  and  they  shall  judge  the  people 
a  righteous  judgment."  Also  the  tribal  judges  and  executive  officers,  we 
are  thus  informed,  were  to  be  elected  or  appointed  by  the  people,  "  Thou 
shalt  give  unto  thee?  and  by  no  other  power  or  authority.  Only  in  time  of 
war,  in  the  organization  of  the  army  of  defense,  Moses  permits  an  excep- 
tion to  this  rule,  and  allows  the  elected  bailiffs  to  appoint  the  officers  of  the 
host.  (Deut.  xx.  9.) 

So  the  lawgiver  in  the  wilderness  has  laid  down  the  three  leading  prin- 
ciples to  secure  and  modify  the  authority  of  society,  and  to  render  it  least 
oppressive  to  the  individual;  and  so  we,  at  this  end  of  the  nineteenth  cen- 
tury, feel  ourselves  obliged  to  acknowledge  his  superior  wisdom.  Let  us 
see  now  how  he  dealt  with  the  authority  of  reason. 

Reason  is  one  of  those  cases  which  can  not  be  reached  by  a  statute  of 
limitation.  It  has  no  boundaries.  It  can  not  be  limited.  Man  will  reason 
in  spite  of  all  danger  and  peril,  even  in  the  face  of  death.  He  reflects  on 
the  unknowable,  and  ponders  over  perpetual  motion  and  the  quadrature  of 
the  circle.  The  ocean  is  not  too  deep  and  heaven  not  too  high  for  reason's 
strides  toward  omnipresence,  time  and  space  limit  not  its  attempt  at  in- 
•  finity.  The  only  misfortune  is,  that  every  man  reasons  with  an  individ- 
ualized intellect  and  under  the  influence  of  accidents.  Therefore  the  di- 
versity of  judgments,  conclusions,  views  and  opinions.  And  yet  everybody 


-aa- 

is  governed  by  his  own  reason,  which  produces  anarchy  and  oppression  by 
the  authority  of  reason.  This  diversity  of  opinions  and  judgments  proves 
that  reason  is  not  infallible,  as  that  anarchy  and  oppression  furnish  the 
evidence  that  unaided  human  reason  is  insufficient  to  govern  society  and 
satisfy  the  individuals  thereof.  If  reason  is  to  govern,  the  question  arises, 
whose  reason?  Answer  this  question  as  you  please,  say  one  potentate  or 
many  heads  united  should  govern,  you  always  exclude  the  great  multi- 
tude, each  of  whom  has  a  reason  and  a  judgment  of  his  own,  tyrannized 
over  by  that  one  potentate  or  those  many  heads. 

The  expediency  to  which  nations  and  communities  had  recourse  was  the 
constitution,  the  charter,  or  a  bill  of  rights,  suppospd  to  be  the  product  of  a 
nation's  reason,  to  prescribe  limits  to  the  power  of  rulers,  legislators  and 
iudges.  It  is  better  than  nothing,  and  answers  the  purpose  temporarily,  as 
is  evident  in  the  history  of  nations  from  the  frequent  and  radical  changes 
of  those  constitutions  and  charters,  none  of  which  has  answered  the  pur- 
pose permanently,  for  each  of  which  is  after  all  the  product  of  some  indi- 
vidual intellects,  which  can  not  comprehend  the  judgment  of  all  and  under 
all  circumstances;  and  none  could  be  universal. 

How  did  Moses  settle  this  difficult  point?  Or  rather  how  does  he  satisfy 
us  on  this  point?  "  And  the  man  Moses  was  very  meek,"  Scripture  reports 
of  him.  He  understood  what  it  meant  when  God  told  him,  "  No  man  can 
see  me  and  live" ;  he  knew  and  comprehended  well  what  so  many  of  us  are 
so  slow  to  admit,  viz :  that  human  reason  has  its  limits,  the  individual 
intellect  has  its  boundaries,  beyond  which  it  can  not  go;  it  must 
stop  somewhere,  and  so  it  must  start  from  certain  fixed  and  positive 
points,  where  all  questions  of  why  and  wherefore  became  illegitimate. 
Reason  itself  must  stop  before  its  own  authority.  Ask  why  this  azure 
dome  above  your  head  appears  to  your  eyes  blue  and  spherical,  why  should 
it  not  be  rose  colored  and  of  oval  form?  Ask  wherefore  the  stars  are  clus- 
tered in  heaven  in  such  irregular  groups,  and  the  distances  between  them 
are  so  different?  Ask  why  and  wherefore  is  the  lily  white  and  the  tulip 
red,  or  why  and  wherefore  has  man  no  wings,  hot  four  legs  or  four  hands 
like  other  animals?  Or,  if  you  please,  ask  what  is  substance,  spirit,  matter, 
force,  sensitiveness  or  consciousness,  and  you  will  be  convinced  that  you 
have  arrived  at  the  boundaries  of  reason,  for  the  wisest  of  the  wise,  the 
princes  of  science  and  philosophy  can  not  answer  those  questions.  We 
know  not,  is  the  humiliating  confession  of  the  individual  intellect  and  the 
aggregated  wisdom  of  mankind.  We  start  from  a  number  of  given  facts 
and  reason  from  analogy,  by  comparison  and  interpretation.  We  must 
stop  somewhere,  because  we  can  not  start  out  with  zero,  and  wherever  we 


—  39  — 

stop  to  start  from,  we  must  have  facts  of  nature  or  history,  or  the  authority 
of  a  superhuman  reason. 

So,  exactly  so  did  Moses  settle  this  difficult  point  for  his  people  and  for  all 
nations  and  gen-erations.  There  is  a  supreme  reason  and  goodness,  super- 
human and  supermundane,  and  that  is  the  eternal  Jehovah,  and  he  makes 
known  to  you  the  universal  facts,  before  which  the  individual  intellect  must 
stop  and  from  which  it  must  start.  These  moral  facts  have  been  actualized 
in  the  doings  and  teachings  of  the  fathers,  and  are  made  known  to  you  now 
under  the  thunders  and  lightnings  of  Sinai  as  the  law  of  the  covenant,  the 
fundamental  law  of  the  nation  and  the  nations  of  all  generations  and  local- 
ities. So  Moses  said  to  his  people,  and  so  he  speaks  to  the  world  forever. 
From  those  facts  thus  given,  he  added,  God  commanded  me  to  start  out, 
develop  and  establish  a  national  code  of  religion,  government  and  ethics; 
and  starting  out  with  those  divine  facts,  and  the  unalloyed  intention  only 
to  actualize  those  divine  teachings  in  laws  and  institutions,  to  realize  truth 
and  righteousness,  prosperity  and  happiness  to  you  and  all  nations  who 
will  do  like  you,  I  know  that  God  speaks  to  me  and  through  me,  I  know 
that  God  is  with  me,  instructs  and  directs  me,  has  chosen  you  and  me  to 
carry  out  this  sublime  scheme  of  salvation.  So  Moses  protected  himself 
and  his  system,  his  people  and  his  fellow-men  against  the  despotism  and 
anarchy  of  individual  reason,  the  ignorance  and  short-sightedness  of  the  hu- 
man intellect.  Whatever  any  prophet  might  tell  you,  he  said  to  his  people, 
you  shall  listen  to  him  except  when  he  says,  "  Let  us  go  and  let  us  worship 
other  gods,"  then  that  prophet  shall  be  put  to  death.  This,  however,  is  the 
beginning  of  rebellion  against  the  substance  of  the  Sianic  revelation,  against 
which  none  is  permitted  to  go.  You  dare  not  go  behind  the  axioms  in 
any  science.  You  must  not  go  against  the  facts  of  nature  and  history. 
Here  are  the  axioms  and  facts  of  God's  law,  here  you  must  stop,  from  this 
point  you  must  start. 

The  highest  authority  therefore  after  revelation  is  the  Law  of  Moses,  not 
indeed  always  in  its  letter,  but  always  in  its  spirit,  as  every  law  and  institu- 
tion thereof  rests  upon  a  Sinaic  principle,  which  does  not  pass  away  as 
times  and  circumstances  and  with  them  the  letters  of  a  law  and  the  utility 
of  an  institution  do.  Not  only  is  the  promise  made  to  Moses,  announced 
in  the  same  revelation,  "  And  they  shall  also  believe  in  thee  forever," 
to  be  fulfilled ;  but  we  have  the  positive  conviction,  at  which  we  have 
arrived  at  this  end  of  the  ninteenth  'century,  that  in  the  main  princi- 
ples of  public  government  Moses  was  as  correct  as  in  his  theology ;  that  his 
sanitary  laws,  his  marital  laws,  his  martial  laws,  his  emancipation  laws,  his 
charity  laws,  and  above  all  his  broad  and  humane  injunctions,  "  Love  thy 
neighbor  as  thyself"  and  "Ye  shall  love  the  stranger,"  are  as  sublime  and 


—  40  — 

divine  as  was  his  lofty  conception  of  Deity  and  humanity,  because  all  was 
of  one  cast,  all  one  and  the  same  realization  of  the  same  Sinaic  princi- 
ple, although  shaped  here  and  there  to  correspond  with  the  habits  and  cir- 
cumstances of  that  time,  people  and  country.  Take  for  instance  his  charity 
laws,  and  remember  that  he  secured  to  the  poor,  widow,  orphan  and 
stranger  the  gleanings  of  the  field,  vineyard  and  olive  orchard,  the  sheaf  for- 
gotten in  the  field,  the  corner  of  the  standing  corn  not  to  be  cut  by  the 
owner,  and  such  other  gifts.  You  will  see  instantly  that  this  particular 
giving  of  alms  does  not  relate  to  the  millionaires  and  merchant  princes  of 
these  or  other  days,  and  can  find  no  literal  application  among  the  husband- 
men of  all  ages.  The  letter  of  the  law  is  abrogated,  but  its  inherent  spirit? 
its  underlying  principle  is  eternal.  It  i«  as  obligatory  to-day  as  it  was  when 
Moses  announced  it  in  the  name  of  God.  This  is  the  case  with  every  law 
and  institution  of  Moses,  which  is  tribal,  local  or  otherwise  accommodating 
in  its  wording.  Therefore  the  Law  of  Moses  is  the  highest  authority  after 
revelation. 

For  Israel,  you  want  me  to  add?  For  Israel  only?  In  the  face  of  truth, 
I  can  not  and  dare  not  make  such  an  assertion.  Revelation  can  not  be 
undone  by  revelation.  Whatever  the  Father  of  mankind  has  given  to  his 
children,  belongs  to  all  of  them.  The  words  of  many  Mosaic  laws  and  the 
nature  of  his  institutions  must  of  necessity  be  tribal,  local  and  transitory  ; 
the  underlying  principles  are  eternal  and  universal,  they  are  the  common 
property  of  all  men,  they  are  obligatory  upon  all  nations  and  generations. 
This  is  the  authority  given  to  reason,  given  to  communities  and  nations, 
according  to  the  very  words  of  Moses,  to  start  from  the  axioms  of  the 
Sinaic  revelation  ;  to  incarnate  those  principles,  as  Moses  did  and  com- 
manded his  successors  to  do,  in  constitutions  and  institutions,  in  laws  and 
ordinances,  in  religious,  political  and  social  practice.  No  individual  rea- 
soner,  and  no  nation  has  a  right  to  deviate  from  this  course,  prescribed  for 
all  of  them  by  the  Almighty  God.  The  progress  of  mankind  to  prosperity 
and  happiness,  to  solidarity,  humanity  and  piety  depends  upon  this  very 
principle ;  and  most  all  miseries  of  the  human  family  rose  from  the  viola- 
tion thereof.  You  have  not  done,  and  you  do  not  do  as  God  has  com- 
manded you  from  Sinai,  therefore  idolatry  and  slavery,  fanaticism  and  op- 
pression, immorality  and  ignorance  make  you  miserable ;  such  is  the  voice 
of  God  to  the  nations.  Obey  and  live,  hearken  and  be  blessed.  Proclaim 
freedom  and  equality  to  all,  justice  and  righteousness  for  all,  charity  and 
good  will  among  all,  slay  not,  steal  not,  debauch  not,  lie  not  and  covet  not, 
honor  your  parents,  worship  God  and  keep  the  Sabbath  holy,  be  conscien- 
tious with  the  laws  of  God,  and  impart  them  to  your  children,  let  all  this 
be  impressed  upon  your  constitutions,  and  institutions,  and  you  will  be  the 


—  41  — 

children  of  the  living  God.  This  is  the  import  of  the  Sinaic  revelation,  the 
message  of  the  Almighty  to  all  nations.  If  you  are  anxious  to  do  right  and 
to  live,  to  prosper  and  progress  to  happiness,  know,  understand  and  com- 
prehend well  the  Sinaic  revelation,  and  be  guided  by  God's  teachings.  Ir 
you  are  anxious  to  apply  those  divine  doctrines  to  the  government  of  na- 
tions, learn  in  and  from  the  Law  of  Moses  how  principles  are  to  be  incar- 
nated in  practical  laws  and  institutions  with  reference  to  time,  locality  and 
historical  antecedents.  God  is  eternal,  his  word  is  eternal,  and  in  this  His 
word  He  promised  to  Moses,  "  And  also  in  thee  they  shall  believe  forever." 


VII. 


SINAI    AND    CALVARY    COMPARED    FROM    THE    ETHICAL 

STANDPOINT. 

That  which  is  right  to  one  ought  to  be  right  to  all;  and  that  which  is 
wrong  for  one  must  be  wrong  for  all — is  the  cardinal  principle  of  divine 
ethics  in  centra-position  to  such  human  forms  of  government,  in  which 
might  is  the  source  of  right  (which  is  also  a  weak  point  of  Baruch  Spinoza), 
the  privileges  of  some  persons  and  classes  and  the  oppression  of  others 
form  the  substratum  of  law,  as  in  the  feudal  system  of  government,  so 
that  the  main  object  of  law  and  government  is,  to  invent  and  apply  the 
means  for  one  class  to  check,  subject  and  control  the  other  class.  The 
form  of  government  basing  strictly  and  exclusively  upon  the  moral  law  is 
ethical,  while  all  forms  of  government  basing  right  upon  might  and  law 
upon  existing  wrongs,  are  martial,  a  state  of  warfare  with  the  enforced  in- 
tervals of  armistice  between,  among  the  classes  and  persons  of  the  same 
commonwealth,  and  consequently  also  of  one  commonwealth  against  the 
other.  This  martial  form  of  government  prevailed  among  all  nations  of 
antiquity,  and  reached  its  culminating  point  in  the  Roman  Empire.  The 
ethical  form  of  government  originated  in  the  Sinaic  revelation  and  the  Law 
of  Moses,  and  always  remained  the  ideal  of  the  Hebrew  State,  however  fre- 
quent the  rebellions  of  kings,  priests  and  people  may  have  been.  All  laws 
of  antiquity,  from  Fo,  Thoth  or  Hermes,  down  to  the  Justinian  code,  in- 
cluding all  philosophies  of  corresponding  ages  and  nations,  are  based  upon 
the  martial  form  of  government ;  while  the  whole  body  of  Jewish  Law  in 
Bible,  Talmud  and  post-Talmudical  casuists  bases  upon  the  ethical  form  of 
government.  Mistakes  were  made,  of  course,  by  this  and  that  ruler,  sage 
or  teacher,  but  the  ground  form  is  invariably  as  stated. 

The  ethical  form  of  government  originating  in  the  Sinaic  revelation,  we 
may  call  it  divine,  as  the  martial  form  of  government  may  be  called  hu- 
man, although  it  is,  and  was  often  far  from  being  humane.  To  this  may 
be  added,  if  Judaism  signifies  the  body  of  doctrine  contained  in  the  Sinaic 
revelation,  then  the  ethical  form  of  government  is  one  of  the  principal  ele- 
ments thereof,  and  is  in  so  far  Jewish  as  it  was  revealed  and  commanded 


—  43  — 

first  to  the  Hebrew  people,  which  was  appointed  to  be  Am  Kadosh,  "  Holy 
Nation,"  in  its  policy,  as  well  as  in  its  polity,  in  its  government  as  well  as 
in  its  religion,  in  its  administration  of  human  affairs,  as  well  as  in  its  di- 
vine worship  and  the  formation  of  private  character,  all  of  which  to  center 
in  and  radiate  from  the  one  fundamental  doctrine  of  the  One  Holy  God  who 
delights  in  purity,  justice  and  human  happiness,  and  destined  man  to  find 
his  prosperity  and  happiness  in  his  endeavor  to  do  justice,  to  love  purity 
and  benignity,  and  to  walk  in  uprightness  before  God. 

Modern  history  begins,  as  is  generally  maintained,  with  the  origin  of 
Christianity.  The  Christianity  of  history,  as  history  developed  it,  points  to 
Mount  Calvary  for  its  starting  point,  as  Judaism  points  to  Mount  Sinai.  It 
looks  upon  the  mundane  existence,  passion,  death  and  resurrection  of 
Jesus  of  Nazareth  as  a  second  revelation,  not  indeed  superseding  the  Si- 
naic  revelation,  for  revelation  can  not  undo  revelation,  but  supplementing 
and  explaining  it  for  the  benefit  also  of  the  Gentiles. 

It  is  not  my  intention  at  present  to  dispute  or  discuss  the  alleged  fact ; 
for  the  sake  of  argument  I  admit  the  standpoints  of  both  Judaism  and 
Christianity,  and  will  merely  attempt  to  solve  the  problem  whence  the  moral 
law  has  its  authority,  from  Sinai  or  Calvary.  Permit  me  to  remark  right 
here  that  every  religion  is  beneficial  to  man,  because  every  one,  the  rudest 
feticism  not  excepted,  contains  rational  and  ethical  elements,  or  else  man 
could  not  have  believed  in  it.  Such  is  the  nature  of  man,  that  fiction  and 
falsehood  prove  acceptable  to  him  only  in  connection  with  truth  and  right- 
eousness. With  every  religious  idea  which  rises  in  the  mind  of  man,  he 
rises  above  the  brutal  sphere  to  the  region  of  ideality,  and  as  he  rises  thus 
he  becomes  a  better  man,  less  governed  by  the  lower  passions  and  animal 
instincts,  and  more  eager  for  a  higher  and  nobler  life.  Every  religious 
idea  is  an  act  of  emancipation  to  the  individual,  liberating  him  from  the  des- 
potism of  sensuality  and  elevating  him  to  the  freedom  of  mind  and  spirit, 
in  the  same  ratio  as  that  religious  idea  contains  truth  and  the  incentive  for 
righteousness.  No  reasoner,  unless  he  be  a  fanatic,  will  oppose  religion 
in  any  form.  It  is  man's  sanctum  sanctorum,  which  none  must  enter  ex- 
cept the  high-priest  of  human  reason,  and  then  only  on  the  Day  of 
Atonement  with  the  overruling  idea  of  peace  and  atonement,  justice  and 
good  will  to  all. 

Let  me  add  here  that  Christianity  has  done  so  large  an  amount  of  good 
and  is  doing  it  now,  that  it  certainly  must  command  respect  as  the  religion 
of  three  hundred  and  more  millions  of  people.  Least  among  all  men  the 
religious  Jew  dare  attack  Christianity  with  any  weapons  except  the  most 
rational  and  most  charitable,  as  he  maintains  that  whatever  is  true  and  be- 
nevolent in  Christianity  is  taken  from  Judaism,  so  that  the  Gospels  also  are 


—  44  — 

compilations  of  more  ancient  Jewish  sentences  and  sentiments,  an  allega- 
tion which  but  lately  Professor  August  Wuensche  proved  to  be  a  fact,  as 
was  done  before  him  by  Kalisch,  Wise,  Nork,  Lightfoot  and  others.  The 
Christianity  or  rather  Chrietology  of  history,  built  up  by  priests,  councils, 
potentates,  legislators  and  dogmatic  reasoners,  which  has  only  its  most  dis- 
tant roots  in  Calvary,  like  the  Talmuds  of  the  Jews  in  the  Law,  and  the  tra- 
ditions of  the  Mohammedans  in  the  Koran,  has  never  been  finally  estab- 
lished in  any  particular  point  with  the  consent  and  to  the  satisfaction  of  all 
Christians.  Like  everything  of  historical  growth,  it  must  be  human  and 
subject  to  the  law  of  dissolution,  hence  also  to  free  discussion  and  com- 
mentation, without  any  attack  on  religion  itself.  Christology  is  not  Chris- 
tianity, and  dogmatism  is  not  religion.  Jesus  of  Nazareth  advanced  no 
dogmas.  Hence,  from  the  Christian  standpoint  it  must  be  admitted  that 
whatever  has  not  been  said  by  Jesus,  can  not  be  placed  in  juxtaposition 
with  the  substance  of  the  Sinaic  revelation. 

Coming  back  to  the  ethical  standpoint  the  question  arises,  as  far  as 
the  government,  laws  and  institutions  of  nations  are  concerned,  did  Jesus 
add  anything  to  the  Sinaic  revelation  or  abrogate  any  of  its  provis- 
ions and  doctrines?  You  may  look  upon  it  from  any  known  stand- 
point, and  you  will  always  feel  obliged  to  answer  this  question  in  the 
negative.  He  did  not  add  thereto,  nor  did  he  diminish  therefrom.  He 
could  not.  Nobody  believing  in  revelation  can,  as  little  as  one  can  improve 
the  totality  of  creation.  He  told  that  young  man  who  inquired  of  him 
what  he  must  do  to  be  saved,  the  very  words  of  the  Decalogue,  and  main- 
tained even  in  regard  to  the  Laws  of  Moses,  that  not  a  tittle  or  an  iota 
thereof  should  remain  unfulfilled,  that  he  had  not  come  to  abolish  bat  to 
fulfill  the  Law.  He  did  not  say  that  the  Sabbath  day  was  abolished,  abro- 
gated or  changed.  When  the  Pharisees  censured  his  disciples  for  plucking 
ears  in  the  field  on  the  Sabbath  day ;  he  merely  said,  as  is  also  in  the  Jew- 
ish writings  (Mechilta),  that  man  was  not  made  for  the  Sabbath,  but  the 
Sabbath  was  made  for  man.  If  it  had  been  his  intention  to  propose  any 
change  in  the  Sinaic  revelation,  he  must  have  said  so  then  and  there,  in- 
stead of  debating  the  question  from  the  Pharisean  standpoint. 

Again,  according  to  the  Gospels  and  Epistles,  the  main  object  of  Jesus 
was  to  establish  the  Kingdom  of  Heaven.  If  you  define  this  Kingdom  from 
the  Jewish  standpoint,  it  is  a  translation  of  the  Hebrew  Malchuth  Shamayim 
or  the  Grecian  "  theocracy,"  and  it  was  the  aim  and  object  of  Jesus  to  re- 
store in  Israel  the  ancient  democratic  theocracy,  as  a  few  decades  before 
him  the  representatives  of  a  great  party  in  Israel  had  asked  it  of  Pompey.  and 
as  during  the  life-time  of  Jesus  other  representatives  of  the  same  party  asked 
it  of  Agustus.  In  this  case,  of  course,  there  could  be  no  idea  that  Jesus  wanted 


—  45  — 

to  change  an  iota  in  the  Sianic  revelation,  which  is  the  very  groundwork 
and  rock  of  the  theocracy.  Look  upon  it  from  the  Christian  standpoint  and 
you  must  admit  that  the  Kingdom  of  Heaven  means  nothing  in  this  life  and 
this  sublunar  world ;  it  begins  with  death  and  refers  exclusively  to  the  salva- 
tion of  the  soul  in  the  life  hereafter.  Therefore  he  is  reported  to  have  said, 
"  My  Kingdom  is  not  of  this  world."  This  is  repeated  in  substance  by  both 
Peter  and  Paul  in  their  respective  Epistles,  who  admonished  the  primitive 
Christians  to  submit  to  any  and  every  political  government,  to  obey  him 
who  bears  the  sword  of  authority,  as  God  must  have  given  it  to  him,  and 
their  Christ  had  not  come  to  interfere  with  the  temporal  affairs  of  man  this 
side  of  the  boundary  line  of  death.  Therefore  Paul  taught  that  faith,  hope 
and  love  were  sufficient  to  guide  the  redeemed  ones  to  salvation  in  life 
eternal.  Hence  it  must  be  admitted,  if  Jesus  had  nothing  to  do  with  the 
affairs  of  this  world,  nothing  with  the  government  of  nations  and  the  rights 
of  man,  he  had  nothing  to  do  with  ethics,  which  concerns  man  in  this  state 
of  existence  first  and  foremost,  and  could  at  no  time  have  thought  of  add- 
ing to  or  taking  away  from  the  Sinaic  revelation. 

The  Sermon  on  the  Mount,  whether  it  was  actually  delivered  by  Jesus 
as  it  is  recorded  by  Matthew,  or  whether  only  a  portion  thereof  was 
delivered  at  some  other  place,  as  Luke  maintains  (chapter  vi.  verse  21), 
or  whether  it  was  not  delivered  at  all,  as  both  Mark  and  John  appear 
to  admit  by  their  silence  regarding  that  important  document,  or 
whether  it  was  compiled  by  Matthew  of  sentences,  which  the  Church 
held  to  have  been  uttered  by  Jesus ;  that  very  Sermon  on  the  Mount, 
concerning  which  Dr.  Zipser,  Prof.  Wuensche  and  others  have  furnished  the 
evidence,  that  every  sentiment  thereof  has  its  parallel  in  the  old  Bible  and 
Talmud ;  that  very  Sermon  on  the  Mount  adds  not  an  iota  to  and  takes 
none  away  from  the  ethics  contained  in  the  Sinaic  revelation,  or  even  in  the 
Laws  of  Moses.  The  eccentricities  and  amplifications  supposed  to  be  con- 
tained in  it  are  easily  explained  by  the  circumstances  and  affairs  of  that 
very  age.  The  very  patriotic  Jews  of  that  day  certainly  hated  their  Roman 
enemies,  who  oppressed  and  maltreated  them,  and  were  always  eager  to 
wage  war  upon  them,  which  Jesus,  like  other  disciples  of  the  Hillel  school, 
discouraged,  maintaining  that  they  could  conquer  and  convert  them  by 
love,  and  by  love  only.  This  is  the  sense  of  "  Love  your  enemies,"  although 
in  the  Christian  theological  sense  it  is  after  all  a  mere  commentary  to  the 
words  of  Moses,  ''Thou  shall  not  hate  thy  brother  in  thy  heart,"  "  Love  thy 
neighbor  as  thyself."  The  Roman  law-courts  were  so  corrupt,  unjust  and  op- 
pressive in  Judea,  that  Jesus  warned  his  people  to  have  nothing  to  do  with 
them  ;  rather  give  a  man  your  cloak,  if  he  takes  your  undergarment ;  walk 
with  him  a  mile,  if  he  forces  you  to  go  one  furlong ;  if  he  strikes  you  on  one 


-  46  — 

cheek,  humbly  offer  him  the  other  to  kiss  or  to  strike,  and  keep  out  of  court. 
This  appears  to  be  the  sense  of  those  respective  passages.  But  also  in  the 
Christian  theological  sense  they  are  an  imitation  of  what  Jeremiah  had  said 
centuries  before  Jesus  under  similar  circumstances.  (Lamentations  iii.  26-30.) 
Jesus  considered  him  an  adulterer  who  looked  upon  his  neighbor's  wife  with 
impure  thoughts,  and  Moses  said,  "  Thou  shalt  not  covet  thy  neighbor's 
wife."  That  Jesus,  who  went  to  Jerusalem  to  celebrate  the  feasts  as  com- 
manded by  Moses,  taught  the  resurrection  of  the  body  exactly  as  the  Phar- 
isees did,  risked  his  life  in  order  to  eat  the  Paschal  lamb  within  the  walls 
of  Jerusalem  and  in  a  house  exactly  as  the  Pharisees  prescribed,  had  cer- 
tainly no  idea  of  adding  to  or  taking  away  from  the  substance  of  the  Sinaic 
revelation  or  even  the  laws  of  Moses. 

If  Jesus  has  left  the  ethics  of  the  Old  Testament  unchanged  and  unaltered, 
without  addition  or  diminution,  then  Calvary  has  added  nothing  to  the  ethics 
of  Sinai.  Therefore,  what  some  gentlemen  are  pleased  to  call  Christian  mor- 
als or  Christian  ethics  are  actually  Jewish  morals  or  Jewish  ethics,  which 
Christendom  accepts  and  indorses.  After  all,  perhaps,  the  name  does  not 
make  much  difference,  although  it  is  always  proper  to  call  things  by  their 
right  names.  It  offers  the  advantage  in  this  particular  respect  that  all  of 
us  become  aware  how  numerous,  essential  and  important  our  "  agree- 
ments" are,  while  our  "  disagreements''  appear  to  be  chiefly  in  names.  In 
this  case  it  appears  it  is  also  of  some  importance  to  know  that  all  Chris- 
tendom accepts  and  indorses  in  theory  the  ethics,  the  moral  principles  of 
the  Sinaic  revelation.  The  same  was  done  by  Mohammed,  who  accused  the 
Jews  of  having  eradicated  all  passages  from  their  Thorah  which  pro- 
phetically referred  to  him  and  his  work.  It  is  important  in  this  connection  to 
know  that  all  civilized  nations  agree  with  Moses  in  the  principle  that  every 
State  and  every  government  of  any  country  should  be  built  up  and  con- 
ducted on  the  moral  principle,  on  the  accepted  code  of  ethics,  and  only  in 
case  of  emergencies,  over  which  a  nation  has  no  control,  is  a  temporary  de- 
viation from  this  principle  admissible.  Change  the  terms,  and  before  you 
stands  in  bold  relief  the  following  proposition  :  All  civilized  nations  agree 
with  Moses  in  principle  or,  at  least,  in  theory,  that  every  State  and  every 
government  of  any  country  should  be  built  up  and  conducted  on  the  moral 
principle  as  revealed  from  Sinai  and  reduced  to  practice  by  Moses  in  his 
construction  of  the  Hebrew  State ;  hence  all  existing  ethics  is  Sinaic.  That 
which  some  gentlemen  are  pleased  to  call  a  Christian  country,  a  Christian 
State  or  a  Christian  government,  is  in  principle  Jewish-Sinaic,  purely  Jew- 
ish, and  only  so  much  thereof  can  possibly  be  Christian,  as  that  State, 
government  or  country  fails  to  realize  and  carry  into  practice  of  the  ethical 
principles  of  the  Sinaic  revelation,  since  Calvary  has  not  amended  the  ethics 


—  47  — 

of  Sinai ;  and  in  so  far  exactly  the  nations  are  wrong  and  the  cause  of  mis- 
ery and  self-destruction. 

In  order  to  judge  these  matters  correctly,  it  must  always  be  borne  in 
mind  that  the  Arabs  and  then  the  Turks  stood  outside  of  the  Greco-Roman 
civilization  by  location,  language  and  government.  The  elements  of  hu- 
man government  with  which  they  entered  the  list  of  civilized  nations,  were 
fragments  of  Oriental  despotism,  remains  of  the  Parthian-Persian  system  and 
the  tribal  dominion  of  patriarchal  lawlessness.  That  heritage  impressed  itself 
on  the  Koran,  the  national  ethics,  the  government,  the  history  and  fatalism 
of  the  Islamitic  nations,  and  destroyed  to  a  great  extent  the  beneficial  in- 
fluence of  the  Sinaic  ethics  adopted  by  Mohammed  and  his  expounders. 
Therefore,  the  Mohammedans  are  so  far  behind  European  Christians  in 
civilization  and  culture.  The  Oriental  Christians  are  not  superior  to  their 
Islamitic  neighbors  in  this  respect.  The  Occidental  Christians,  by  lan- 
guage, location  and  government,  were  the  direct  heirs  of  the  Greco-Roman 
civilization  and  culture.  However  often  they  were  overrun  by  barbarous 
hordes,  revolutionized  and  overthrown,  the  ground  form  of  that  heritage  al- 
ways rose  again  from  the  ruins,  and  especially  among  the  Latin  races. 
Therefore,  the  elements  of  the  ancient  civilization  afforded  advantages  to 
the  Occidental  nations  which  the  Oriental  nations  did  not  possess.  This 
is,  perhaps,  the  main  cause  of  the  superiority  of  the  Occidental  Christians 
over  the  Oriental  nations.  With  the  Greco-Roman  civilization,  however, 
Occidental  Christendom  inherited  also  the  human  elements  of  Roman 
government  and  ethics  and  the  feudal  system  of  its  own  making.  This 
heritage  has  impressed  itself  upon  most  all  institutions  and  organizations 
of  Christendom,  exercised  its  nugatory  influence  upon  the  development  of 
Christology  and  government,  and  to  a  great  extent  counteracted  and  neu- 
tralized the  beneficial  influence  of  the  ethics  from  the  Sinaic  revelation. 
This  is  the  ground-work  of  the  historic  struggle  among  European  nations, 
which  became  most  conspicuous  in  the  struggle  of  the  Common  Law  against 
the  Civil  Law,  the  Reformation  against  the  established  Church,  the  bloody 
revolutions  which  are  still  at  work,  and  the  attempts  of  science  and  phi- 
losophy to  rise  above  all  established  authority. 

The  Sinaic  revelation  demands  freedom  and  equality  for  all  members  of 
any  commonwealth,  and  the  Christian  potentates  built  up  huge  despot- 
isms, with  privileged  and  pariah  classes.  Therefore,  justice  was  made  a 
mere  hand-maid  of  the  thrones  and  a  body-guard  of  the  privileged  classes, 
to  the  oppression  and  detriment  of  the  multitudes.  Where  there  is  no  free- 
dom and  equality  there  can  be  no  justice.  As  long  as  there  are  privileged 
and  pariah  classes,  as  long  .as  men  are  forced  into  the  military  straight 
jacket  against  their  will,  as  long  as  society  anywhere  is  divided  into  lords 


—  48  - 

and  human  dogs,  there  can  be  no  freedom,  no  equality,  no  justice,  hence  no 
government  of  divine  ethics.  God  said,  "  Thou  shalt  have  no  other  gods 
before  me,"  and  in  Christendom  there  are  worshiped  as  many  gods  as  there 
are  supposed  persons  in  the  Deity;  there  were  made  as  many  demi-gods  as 
there  were  emperors,  kings,  princes,  popes,  cardinals,  bishops  and  other 
imitations  of  the  Roman  Pantheon.  God  commanded,  u  Remember  the 
Sabbath-day  to  keep  it  holy,"  and  Christendom  has  abolished  the  Sabbath- 
day  and  forces  men  by  laws  and  social  circumstances  to  sanction  the  viola- 
tion of  God's  law.  "  Thou  shalt  not  kill  "  is  the  divine  law ;  war,  incessant 
war,  is  the  human  law,  and  murder  is  frequently  sanctioned  besides  by  in- 
sufficient laws  or  the.  lack  of  their  enforcement.  "  Thou  shalt  not  steal  "  is 
another  divine  law,  and  potentates  steal  countries  and  nations,  because,  as 
they  say,  they  need  them.  Government  officers  steal  and  teach  the  people 
that  stealing  is  not  so  bad  a  business  after  all.  And  so  we  might  go  on  for 
hours,  but  it  would  prove  no  more  than  these  facts  do,  viz,  that  the  misery 
and  self-destruction  of  nations  rise  from  their  neglect  of  Sinai,  their  neglect  to 
form  and  execute  the  laws  on  the  ethics  of  the  Sinaic  revelation,  to  establish 
and  maintain  government  on  the  ethical  principle,  as  Moses  constructed 
the  Hebrew  State ;  God  promised  to  the  seed  of  Abraham,  "  And  I  will  be 
their  Elohim"  i.  e.,  absolute  justice  and  supreme  wisdom  shall  be  the 
base  and  superstructure  of  their  government  and  laws.  All  revolutions 
signify  the  rise  of  the  human  family  toward  the  ethical  standpoint  of  the 
Sinaic  revelation.  The  world  Judaizes  and  has  Judaized  for  the  last  two 
thousand  years;  because  there  is  only  one  standard  of  ethics,  and  that  is 
the  Revelation  on  Mount  Sinai. 


VIII. 
FREEDOM  THE   POSTULATE   OF  ETHICS. 

Freedom  is  the  word  which  finds  a  joyous  re-echo  in  every  human  heart. 
It  is  the  Shibboleth  of  nations,  the  magic  sound  from  the  angel's  trumpet  of 
resurrection,  a  ray  of  heaven's  light  penetrating  into  the  vale  of  darkness. 
For  what  are  slavery,  darkness  and  death  but  the  loss  of  freedom,  as  life, 
light  and  liberty  are  but  freedom  actualized.  Every  living  creature,  like  the 
merry  lark,  rising  skyward  with  joyous  song,  feels  that  freedom  is  its  birth- 
right, and  deprived  of  it,  it  mourns  its' loss  and  pines  away  even  unto  death. 
Wherever  there  is  life  there  is  will,  and  wherever  there  is  will  there  is  volun- 
tary volition,  which  is  the  exercise  of  freedom ;  hence  there  is  no  life  without 
freedom  and  no  freedom  without  life.  Nature  is  a  piece  of  exact  mechanism? 
hence  without  freedom,  to  the  atomist  and  monist,  who  sees  in  it  but  iron 
and  relentless  laws.  The  theist,  however,  who  observes  in  every  movement 
and  quality  of  matter  the  manifestation  of  the  spirit  and  the  demonstra- 
tion of  life,  will  and  reason,  discovers  freedom  in  the  concentric  as  well 
as  in  eccentric  movements  of  nature's  offspring.  Not  one  leaflet  is  like  the 
other  on  the  same  rose,  no  two  beings  are  identical,  no  two  leaves  on  the 
same  tree,  no  two  berries  on  the  same  cluster.  Crystals  also  show  individ- 
uality. . 

Freedom  is  the  power  (not  an  abstraction),  inherent  in  the  individual  to 
rest  or  to  move  and  act  in  obedience  only  to  its  own  inherent  law  and  its 
own  volition,  without  compulsion  or  coercion  from  abroad.  Being  a  power, 
it  is  a  function  which  must  emanate  from  some  substance,  and  this  can  be 
spirit  only.  Hence,  wherever  we  find  freedom  there  must  be  spirit,  in  the 
individual  or  the  cosmos.  It  is  God  in  the  universe,  it  is  human  mind  in 
man,  as  Elihu  said  to  Job,  "Verily,  it  is  the  spirit  in  man,  and  the  breath 
of  the  Almighty  which  giveth  him  understanding." 

Therefore  it  must  be  legitimate  to  maintain  that  legislation  against  free- 
dom is  legislation  against  nature  and  nature's  God.  All  just  legislation 
must  start  with  the  principle  of  freedom,  universal  and  individual,  and  must 
have  the  ultimate  object  in  view  to  harmonize  the  volitions  of  many  free 
individuals  associated  for  their  mutual  benefit  and  the  benefit  of  the  human 
family.  Every  other  legislation  is  unjust  and  contrary  to  the  will  of  God 

7 


—  50  - 

manifested  in  His  works,  although  it  may  be  momentarily  justfiable  by 
emergencies,  over  which  the  legislator  has  no  control.  Permanent  laws 
must  be  just  and  capable  of  universal  application. 

When  we  speak  of  revelation  and  revealed  laws,  we  speak  of  freedom  and 
justice.  For  the  laws  expressed  in  God's  words  must  be  in  kind  the  same 
as  those  revealed  in  His  works.  The  revealed  material,  as  it  is  before  us, 
appears  to  be  the  mundane  expression  of  those  supermundane  principles  of 
freedom  and  justice.  God  is  free  and  just.  This  appears  to  be  the  starting 
point  of  the  revelation.  ''  I,  Jehovah,  am  thy  Elohim,  who  brought  thee  out 
of  the  land  of  Egypt,  out  of  the  house  of  bondage."  This  is  premised  with 
the  words,  "  For  mine  is  the  whole  earth" ;  hence  God  is  not  only  mightier 
than  the  mightiest,  as  there  exists  nothing  to  restrain  His  power,  the  earth  is 
His  earth,  the  heaven  is  His  heaven,  the  world  is  His  world,  all  subject  to  His 
will,  but  He  is  also  absolutely  free,  without  any  compulsion  or  coercion  from 
abroad,  and  absolutely  just,  which  is  demonstrated  in  Israel's  liberation,  and 
understood  per  se,  inasmuch  as  he  who  is  absolutely  potent  and  free  could 
only  be  absolutely  just. 

However,  God's  freedom  and  justice  are  indicated  there  chiefly  as  a  decla- 
ration of  man's  freedom,  and  the  foundation  for  the  divine  command  to  man 
to  be  just  and  righteous.  If  there  were  no  freedom  and  justice  in  God,  they 
could  not  be  expected  in  man.  Whatever  is  not  in  the  whole  can  not  be  ex- 
pected in  any  part  thereof.  Demonstrate  away  freedom,  by  any  method,  from 
nature  and  nature's  God,  and  it  has  no  hold  in  human  nature.  Demonstrate 
away  freedom  and  there  is  no  justice,  no  righteousness  and  no  virtue.  The 
pantheists,  fatalists  and  predestinarians  know  not  what  they  do  in  their  ne- 
gation of  freedom ;  they  know  not  that  they  destroy  the  postulate  of  ethics. 

Man's  freedom  is  indicated  in  the  very  act  of  divine  legislation,  as  laws 
could  be  ordained  only  for  free  agents.  None  will  command  the  stone  to 
preserve  its  inertia,  when  it  can  not  move  of  its  own  accord.  Nor  will  an 
intelligent  being  command  the  marble  to  become  a  statue,  when  it  can 
only  submit  to  the  sculptor's  hands.  It  is  further  indicated  in  the  promise 
of  reward  to  him  who  shall  obey,  and  punishment  to  the  disobedient,  as 
the  principle  is  already  laid  down  in  the  premises,  "  And  now  if  ye  will 
diligently  hearken  unto  my  voice,  and  ye  will  guard  my  covenant,  ye  shall 
be  unto  me  a  peculiar  nation,"  etc.  Here  is  evidently  freedom,  for  the  pos- 
sibility of  obedience  or  disobedience  is  surmised.  The  same  idea  is  also 
expressed  in  the  obligation  of  the  people,  the  promise  to  obey,  and  in  the 
word  of  God  addressed  to  Moses  (Exodus  xxiv.  12),  "Come  up  to  me,  up 
the  mountain,  and  be  there,  and  I  will  give  the  tables  of  stone  and  the 
Thorah  and  the  commandment  which  I  have  written  to  teach  them" ;  to 
teach  and  not  to  impose  on  them  as  an  iron  necessity,  the  Thorah  and  the 


—  51  — 

commandment.  This  presupposes  freedom.  Clearest,  however,  this  prin- 
ciple is  expressed  in  the  event  succeeding  the  Sinaic  revelation  (Exodus 
xx.  17),  which  is  expounded  in  Deuteronomy  v.  20-26,  thus  :  The  Israel- 
ites, after  having  heard  and  seen  the  Sinaic  revelation,  were  very  much  ter- 
rified, and  dreaded  to  hear  the  voice  of  God  any  longer  and  any  more ;  u  lest 
we  might  die,"  said  they,  and  they  asked  Moses  to  bring  them  the  laws  of 
God,  so  that  they  need  again  not  hear  the  Almighty  speak.  It  is  reported 
then  that  God  consented  to  the  people's  proposition,  and  also  said  to  Mo- 
ses, u  I  wish  that  they  had  this  heart  (will)  to  fear  me  and  to  observe  all 
my  commandments  all  the  days,  that  it  might  be  well  with  them  and  their 
children  forever."  God  accords  the  people's  proposition,  this  sanctions 
the  authority  of  human  reason.  God  wishes  they  might  always  obey  His 
laws,  this  expresses  most  forcibly  the  moral  freedom  of  man,  his  account- 
ablity  to  his  Maker,  and  the  principle  of  justice  in  God's  government. 
Again  and  again  this  principle  is  expressed  in  Scriptures  most  clearly  and 
forcibly  (Deut.  vii.  11,  12;  xi.  26-28;  xxx.  15,  16),  so  that  the  prophet 
Isaiah  could  announce  to  his  people  this  divine  oracle  (i.  19),  "  If  ye  shall 
will  and  hearken,  ye  shall  eat  the  good  of  the  land ;  if  ye  shall  refuse  and 
rebel,  the  sword  shall  consume  you,  for  so  the  mouth  of  God  hath  spoken." 
This  last  phrase  refers  to  the  Sinaic  revelation.  The  two  additional  and 
apparently  sup^erflous  verbs  of  Thobeh,  "  If  you  shall  will,"  and  themo'enu^ 
"  If  you  shall  refuse,"  emphasize  the  doings  and  omissions  as  free  will  acts, 
in  order  to  merit  the  recompense,  which  the  prophet  announces.  This  is 
the  case  throughout  the  old  Bible.  Freedom  is  the  postulate  of  ethics  and 
the  cause  of  man's  accountability  to  his  Maker.  Man  is  capable  of  not 
only  receiving  and  understanding  God's  law,  the  expression  of  His  will,  but 
has  also  the  power  inherent  in  his  spiritual  nature  to  obey  and  execute  it, 
to  live  and  act  under  it,  and,  therefore,  he  is  accountable  to  God  for  all  his 
doings  and  omissions.  There  is  a  moral  government  in  the  world,  because 
God  is  just  and  man  is  free.  This,  according  to  the  Sinaic  revelation,  is 
the  postulate  of  ethics. 

Long  after  the  close  of  the  canon,  when  speculative  minds  analyzed  those 
doctrines  and  attempted  to  solve  the  problem  by  discursive  reasoning,  the 
questions  arose  as  to  how  much  Satan  has  to  do  with  the  cause  of  human 
disobedience  and  wickedness,  and  again  as  to  how  much  God's  special 
grace  has  to  do  with  man's  power  to  turn  from  his  evil  ways  and  choose 
again  the  path  of  righteousness.  In  principle  this  was  a  limitation  of  man's 
freedom.  It  is  not  altogether  he  who  sins,  as  Satan  has  his  share  in  the 
disobedience,  and  we  are  unable  to  say  how  much  of  it  really  belongs  to  his 
Satanic  majesty,  and  how  much  to  the  will  of  man.  Nor  is  it  altogether  man 
who  does  that  which  is  good  and  right,  as  God's  special  grace  has  its 


—  52  — 

share  in  man's  power  for  good,  and  none  knows  which  share  is  largest 
God's  or  man's.  The  rabbis  of  the  Talmud  reduced  the  evil  influence  upon 
man  to  his  temperament  and  natural  disposition,  and  called  Satan  in  this 
capacity  Yetzer  ha-Rah,  to  which  they  added  that  in  one  respect  he  is  Satan, 
in  another  the  evil  disposition,  and  again  in  another  the  angel  of  death. 
Paul  gave  expression  to  this  rabbinical  doctrine  in  a  peculiar  figure  of 
speech,  saying  that  he  had  a  thorn  in  his  flesh.  On  the  whole  those  rabbis 
paid  no  particular  respect  to  Satan,  and  would  scarcely  grant  him  personal 
existence,  although  the  later  Persian  rabbis  had  their  demonology  with  a 
number  of  Satan  stories.  The  Satan  story  in  Matthew  iv.,  partly  also  in 
Luke  iv.,  of  which  Mark  had  no  knowledge  and  which  John  did  not  accept, 
is  undoubtedly  an  anachronism,  and  appears  to  have  grown  out  of  one 
verse  in  Mark  (i.  12),  which  a  later  writer  amplified  in  the  style  of  the  Mac- 
cabean  story  of  Hannah  and  her  seven  sons,  as  in  Luke,  and  a  still  later 
writer  made  of  it  the  story  as  in  Matthew. 

As  far  as  the  special  grace  of  God,  which  must  move  or  support  man,  in  order 
to  enable  him  to  overcome  sin  and  to  be  righteous  is  concerned,  the  rabbis 
of  the  Talmud  admit  its  mere  existence  from  on  high  and  maintain  Hab-ba 
letaher  mesayin  lo  min  hash-Shamayim,  "  He  who  cometh  to  purify  himself  is 
assisted  from  Heaven,"  which  is  to  say,  that  the  divine  influence  supports 
him  who,  by  his  own  free  volition  and  resolution,  endeavors  to  come  out  of 
the  bondage  of  sin,  without  setting  at  naught  or  limiting  the  free  will  of 
man.  It  is  merely  maintained  that  the  good  has  the  assistance  of  Heaven. 
This,  it  appears,  was  also  the  doctrine  of  the  primitive  Christians  accord- 
ing to  Clemens,  of  Alexandria  (Strom,  vii.  2,  7),  Origines  (De  Princip.  iii. 
22)  and  others.  When  the  dispute  between  Pelagius  and  St.  Augustine 
waxed  hot,  the  doctrine  was  analyzed  and  all  its  elements  were  discussed. 
Pelagius  adhered  to  the  Jewish  doctrine  and  said  (Pelag.  in  August,  de  grat. 
Christi  7),  somewhat  to  this  effect;  if  God,  by  any  special  act  of  grace, 
must  produce  in  us  obedience  to  this  law,  then  we  are  led  into  the  absurd- 
ity that  God  gave  His  laws  not  to  us  but  to  His  own  grace ;  but  they  were 
given  to  our  free  will,  which  must  have  the  power  to  observe  them,  and 
God's  special  grace  may  support  it.  But  the  Church  had  already  adopted 
the  doctrine  of  vicarious  atonement  by  the  passions  and  blood  of  the  Re- 
deemer. If  man,  by  his  own  free  volition,  could  overcome  sin  and  walk  in 
the  path  of  righteousness,  then  this  grace  of  God  is  inherent  in  all  men  and 
must  be  an  inborn  power  of  human  nature.  If  so,  why  did  Jesus  suffer  and 
die?  What  was  gained  by  his  passions  and  blood? — what  has  the  Church  to 
offer  to  her  converts  which  they  do  not  already  possess? — where  is  the  su- 
periority of  the  Christian  faith?  Therefore,  Augustine  prevailed  over 
Pelagius,  and  imposed  upon  the  Church  the  whole  burden  of  the  original  sin, 


—  53  — 

the  fall  of  the  first  parents,  the  siijful  nature  of  all  their  descendants,  the 
necessity  of  redemption  in  consequence  thereof  by  faith  in  the  redeeming 
power  of  Christ's  blood,  shed  for  the  sins  of  his  believers  in  all  generations, 
and  all  the  logical  sequences  of  that  doctrine  of  redemption,  predestination 
and  the  damnation  not  only  of  all  unbelievers,  but  of  many  believers  as 
well,  who,  by  the  arbitrary  and  unjust  will  of  God,  are  destined  to  eter- 
nal suffering. 

Thomas  de  Aquino,  the  philosophical  genius  of  the  Church  in  the  Middle 
Ages,  was  the  man  who  formulated  and  established  the  Augustinean  creed, 
if  it  may  be  called  so.  On  the  other  hand  Duns  Scotus  and  his  followers 
modified  it  by  semi-Pelagian  objections,  and  the  questions  were  not 
finally  settled,  when  the  Reformation  overtook  the  scholastic  discussions. 
Both  Melanchton  and  Martin  Luther  accepted  the  whole  apparatus  of  re- 
demption as  it  was  formulated  by  Augustine  and  Thomas  de  Aquino,  until 
Erasmus  forced  them  to  abandon  that  position  in  part,  while  Calvin  ac- 
cepted and  advocated  the  whole  theory  with  all  its  consequences.  Still 
both  Luther  and  Calvin  agreed  that  man  is  naturally  corrupt,  depraved, 
and  impotent  to  overcome  sin  and  to  walk  in  the  path  of  righteousness.  He 
must  be  redeemed  by  his  faith  in  the  vicarious  atonement  of  the  Redeemer 
if  this  faith  comes  in  connection  with  the  election  of  the  candidate  by  the 
arbitrary  will  of  God,  according  to  Calvin.  Both  agree  that  man  has  no 
free  will ;  the  good  can  not  be  accomplished  without  the  aid  of  the  Church  ; 
human  reason  is  under  the  control  of  Satan ;  and  yet  man  is  accountable 
to  God  for  his  deeds,  and  is  condemned  in  his  wickedness,  although  he  has 
no  free  will,  or,  according  to  Qalvin's  predestination,  no  will  at  all  worth 
speaking  of.  The  attack  of  F.  Socin  upon  the  Armenians  produced  a 
change  in  this  doctrine,  especially  among  Liberal  Christian  sects.  Still 
neither  of  them  can  admit  the  free  will  of  man  and  his  inherent  power  for 
doing  the  good,  without  some  qualification,  or  else  they  must  deny  the  re- 
deeming power  of  their  Christ,  inasmuch  as  there  would  be  nothing  left  to 
be  redeemed  from.  If  my  will  is  naturally  potent  enough  to  do  the  good,  has 
perfect  freedom  to  do  it,  and  my  reason  enlightened  by  the  Sinaic  revela- 
tion, which  is  the  common  property  of  all  men,  guides  me  to  distinguish 
correctly  right  from  wrong,  good  from  evil,  and  truth  from  falsehood, — I 
could  not  possibly  be  redeemed  from  anything  by  any  faith,  creed  or  church. 
If  there  is  nothing  to  enslave  me,  I  can  not  possibly  be  liberated.  There- 
fore, every  Christian  must  deny  free  will  in  order  to  be  a  Christian. 

I  believe  I  have  fairly  stated  this  "  disagreement"  between  Jew  and 
Christian.  It  centers  in  the  idea  of  free  will,  freedom,  which  Judaism  main- 
tains without  qualification,  unless  a  man's  crimes  degraded  him  to  bru- 


-  64  — 

tality ;  and  Christianity  in  all  its  various  sects  must  either  deny  or  so 
modify  it  that  it  ceases  to  be  freedom  in  its  proper  sense. 

It  could  not  be  my  intention  here  to  decide  the  question.  I  will  only 
call  your  attention  to  the  practical  decision  of  the  civilized  world.  Moral 
philosophy,  as  I  believe  I  have  stated  in  the  introduction,  can  not  build 
up  a  code  of  ethics  on  that  particular  dogma  of  the  Church.  If  there 
were  no  freedom,  there  could  be  no  accountability ;  there  could  be  nothing  in 
man's  doings  or  omissions  which  is  either  positively  good  or  bad,  and  the 
moral  idea  itself  evaporate*.  Inasmuch  as  I  am  not  responsible  for  that 
which  God  or  Satan  does  through  me,  I  am  not  a  moral  being,  no  free  agent, 
there  is  no  moral  law  in  man ;  it  is  a  mere  issue  between  God  and  Satan,  the 
causes  and  objects  of  which  are  unknown  to  man,  who  is  a  mere  instrument, 
and  no  man  could  possibly  build  up  a  system  of  moral  philosophy  upon 
that  basis.  Therefore,  the  moral  philosophers  are  under  the  obligation  of  re- 
jecting that  particular  dogma  of  the  Church,  and  to  build  upon  the  Sinaic 
theory  of  personal  freedom  and  accountability,  and  the  general  moral  gov- 
ernment. If  one  or  the  other  philosopher  still  calls  his  system  of  ethics 
Christian,  and  not  Jewish,  which  it  actually  is  by  its  substance,  we  can 
only  imagine  that  he  has  unwittingly  abandoned  the  dogma  and  returned 
to  the  Jewish  aspect  of  morals  as  the  primitive  Christians  did,  whose  con- 
ceptions, as  to  the  incompatibility  of  the  logical  sequences  of  freedom  and 
vicarious  atonement,  were  imperspicuous  and  undefined.  As  far  as  moral 
philosophy  is  concerned,  so  much  is  certain,  the  civilized  world  decides  in. 
favor  of  the  Jewish'doctrine  of  freedom  as  the  postulate  of  ethics. 

As  the  practice  is  more  important  than  the  theory,  the  governments  and 
legislatures  of  the  civilized  countries  are  more  important  than  moral  philos- 
ophy. The  civilized  countries  the  world  over  make  and  enforce  laws  on  the 
principle  of  moral  freedom  and  the  accountability  of  every  sane  person  of 
maturity,  as  though  the  dogmas  of  the  Church  had  never  existed.  The  law 
nowhere  admits  any  criminal's  plea,  that  Satan  wrought  the  evil  deed  in 
him,  who  is  but  a  tool,  or  that  God  predestined  him  for  damnation,  so^he 
could  not  help  committing  crimed.  No  offender  can  justify  his  misdeeds 
before  the  law  by  the  dogma,  because  the  law  is  based  upon  the  ideas  of  per- 
sonal freedom  and  accountability.  No  government  appoints,  and  no  people 
elects  judges  or  executors  of  the  law  under  the  supposition  that  the  Holy 
Ghost  will  give  them  wisdom  and  rectitude,  whatever  they  might  have  been 
or  have  done  heretofore.  Is  that  man  fit  for  that  position  by  the  requirements 
of  his  reason  and  the  uprightness  of  his  will,  as  demonstrated  in  his  ante- 
cedents? is  the  question  to  be  answered  entirely  irrespective  of  the  dogma. 
The  question  is,  are  his  reason  and  will  correct?  which  means  free,  energetic 
and  enlightened,  and  not  what  does  or  will  God  or  Satan  do  through  him. 


—  55  — 

I  do  not  speak  of  existing  prejudices,  more  or  less  influential  in  this  or 
that  locality ;  I  speak  of  the  principle  underlying  all  civil  government  and 
legislation;  and  this  is  freedom  as  the  postulate  of  ethics,  and  not  the 
dogma.  Therefore,  it  must  be  admitted  that  the  fundamental  idea  of  con- 
stitutional government,  the  Rechtsstaal,  is  Jewish,  as  expressed  in  the  Si- 
naic  revelation,  and  not  Christian,  as  advanced  by  St.  Augustine,  modu- 
lated by  Thomas  de  Aquino  or  Duns  Scotus,  accepted  by  the  Reformers 
and  impressed  on  the  creeds  and  catechisms.  There  is  no  medium  between 
free  and  not  free.  Man  must  be  one  or  the  other.  Moral  philosophy  and 
all  modern  governments  decide  the  question  in  favor  of  Sinai.  If  it  is  not 
supposed  that  the  vast  majority  of  all  reasoning  human  beings  are  predes- 
tined for  damnation,  it  must  be  admitted  that  this  very  majority  decides 
the  question  in  favor  of  Freedom  as  the  postulate  of  ethics,  and  we  declare 
it  decided  on  their  responsibility. 


IX. 
PROVIDENCE  AND  THE  DOGMA. 

All  thinking  men  necessarily  agree  that  there  is  in  or  above  this  world  of 
our  cogitation  a  power  superior  to  that  of  man  individually  and  collectively. 
NL,  .ralists  call  it  Nature,  .fatalists  call  it  Fate,  scientists  invented  for 
it  the  terms  Laws  of  Nature,  pagans  named  it  the  Domination  of  the  Gods, 
philosophers  announce  it  as  the  Moral  Government  of  the  World  (die  sitt- 
liche  Weltordnung),  which  is  a  mere  definition  of  that  sovereign  exercise  of 
the  supreme  power  which  all  theists  and  religionists  call  Providence  or  the 
government  of  God  in  this  concrete  and  visible  world,  the  spiritual  and 
moral  doings  of  man.  Every  language  of  civilized  people  has  a  term  or  a 
phrase  referring  to  man's  dependency  on  Providence.  The  Bible  contains 
the  most  various  terms  and  phrases  to^expreas  this  idea.  The  Hebrews  of 
Post-biblical  days  coined  the  Hebrew  noun  Hashgachah  for  Providence 
from  a  verb  used  in  this  sense  in  the  Bible,  and  the  popular  phrase  Im 
yirtzeh  hash-Shem,  "  If  it  shall  please  God, "  which  has  found  its  way  into 
all  modern  languages.  The  biblical  term  for  Providence  is  Adoni,  "  Lord," 
which  reappears  in  the  Phoenician  Adonis,  and  is  a  peculiar  plural  form  of 
adon,  "  a  human  lord  or  master,"  to  designate  God  as  the  sole  sovereign  of 
the  world ;  God  revealed  in  history.  According  to  the  Bible  record,  Abra- 
ham was  the  first  man  who  called  God  Adoni.  (Genesis  xv.  2.)  So  it  ap- 
pears, he  was  the  first  to  recognize  the  universal  government  of  God,  the 
Unity  of  Deity,  as,  according  to  Moses  Maimonides,  Abraham  was  the  first 
who  conceived  the  idea  of  the  cosmos  created  by  the  ONE  GOD,  and  there- 
fore called  him  Koneh  Shamayim  ve-Eretz,  "  Possessor  of  hesfven  and 
earth  "  (Genesis  xiv.  22),  and  also  "  Judge  of  all  the  earth."  (Ibid.  xvii.  25.) 
The  same  idea,  in  the  form  of  Preserver,  is  expressed  in  God's  name  of 
El-Shaddi,  with  which,  it  is  said,  he  made  himself  known  to  Abraham 
(Genesis  xvii.  1  and  Exodus  vi.  3) ;  while  the  idea  of  special  Providence  is 
expressed  for  the  first  time  in  the  prayer  of  Abraham  for  the  wicked  people 
of  Sodom  and  Gomorrah.  The  logical  connection  of  these  ideas  is  evident. 

From  Abraham  to  Moses  the  idea  of  special  Providence  predominates  in 
the  Bible  record,  because  the  history  of  the  Abrahamitic  family  is  its  main 
subject.  With  Moses  both  aspects  reappear  in  the  only  proper  name  of 
God,  the  ineffable  JEHOVAH,  the  definition  of  which  is  given  in  Exodus 


—  57  — 

(iii.  14),  "  And  Elohim  said  to  Moses  Ehyeh  asher  Ehyeh"  etc.,  which 
signifies  not  merely  I  AM,  but  "  I  am  the  eternal  being,  essentiality  and 
substance  of  all  that  is,  was  or  will  be,"  hence  of  all  "  Becoming,"  as  the 
Hebrew  verb  hayah  includes  the  two  ideas  of  being  and  becoming,  and  the 
latter  denotes  a  mere  function  of  the  former.  In  the  same  passage  the  di- 
vine voice  commands  Moses  to  go  to  the  children  of  Israel  and  tell  them 
Ehyeh  (the  first  person),  which  signifies  Jehovah  (in  the  third  person), 
"  sendeth  me  to  you,"  no  tribal  god  and  no  special  deity ;  the  one,  only 
Eternal  and  Sole  God,  as  high  and  exalted,  as  profound  and  comprehensive 
or  rather  infinitely  higher  than  human  speculation  can  conceive  Deity ;  and 
add  thereto,  the  divine  voice  commanded,  that  this  Jehovah  is  also  the  God 
of  your  fathers,  Abraham,  Isaac  and  Jacob,  whom  you  know  as  Elohim, 
Adoni  and  El-Shaddi,  the  Creator,  Governor  and  Preserver  of  the  universe, 
the  universal  and  special  Providence. 

All  conceptions  of  tribal,  local,  special,  tutelar  or  national  gods  of  pagan 
speculation  and  modern  reproduction  fall  to  the  ground,  flat  and  dead,  be- 
fore this  simple  passage  of  two  verses  in  Exodus.  The  idea  is  clear  and 
evident.  The  Eternal  Being,  the  cause  and  substance  of  all  "  Becoming," 
must  necessarily  be  life  and  love,  will  and  power,  self-conscious  intellect 
and  sovereign  wisdom  beyond  all  knowable  and  thinkable  perfection,  as  life, 
love,  will  and  power,  self-conscious  intellect  and  wisdom  are  manifest  in 
the  perpetual  •'  Becoming,"  in  the  eternal  fitness  of  things,  the  beauty  and 
harmony  of  nature,  the  teleological  construction  of  living  organisms,  the 
functions  and  manifestations  of  all  living  creatures ;  and  reason  can  not 
help  admitting  that  there  can  be  nothing  in  any  effect  which  is  not  the 
cause  thereof,  and  ''  Becoming"  is  the  effect  of  "  Being."  If  that  is  so,  and 
none  has  ever  been  able  to  gainsay  it  successfully,  then  God  must  be  mani- 
fest in  every  one  of  His  creatures,  as  well  as  in  the  totality  of  his  creation ; 
his  wisdom,  goodness,  power  and  truth  must  extend  to  the  very  lowest  as 
well  as  the  highest  of  His  creatures  :  and  thus  He  must  be  Providence,  uni- 
versal and  special.  So  we  are  told  that  Moses  knew  the  God  of  the  fathers, 
and  so  he  was  commanded  to  announce  and  expound  the  ineffable  One  to 
Israel,  so  to  be  made  known  to  all  the  children  of  man. 

Permit  me,  ladies  and  gentlemen,  to  deviate  for  a  minute  from  our  sub- 
ject, in  order  to  remark  that  there  is  no  positive  atheist.  There  are  atheists 
by  levity,  persons  whose  thoughts  never  reached  beyond  the  sensual  sphere, 
and  whose  vulgar  motto  is,  1  do  not  care.  Another  class  of  atheists  is 
made  by  degradation,  they  want  no  God  to  take  cognizance  of  their  mis- 
deeds and  persuade  themselves  that  there  is  none.  Then.come  the  atheists 
by  the  grace  of  their  company.  They  happened  to  come  in  contact  with 
atheists  of  any  class,  and  being  themselves  incapable  or  too  indolent  to  rea- 


—  58  — 

son  correctly  and  thoroughly,  adopt  their  companions'  theories.  None  of 
these  classes  can  be  called  positive  in  their  theories,  as  they  do  not  rise 
from  the  source  of  logical  thought.  It  is  with  them  a  mere  aberration  of  a 
periodical  nature.  Scientists  may  become  atheistical  by  the  habit  of  ex- 
pounding all  phenomena  on  strictly  mechanical  principles  or  by  the  at- 
tempt of  applying  the  laws  of  one  science  to  all  of  them  and  to  the  science 
of  sciences,  a  systematic  understanding  of  the  whole  world  ( Weltanschau- 
ung). But  none  of  them  has  become  a  positive  atheist,  if  we  are  to  be- 
lieve their  own  confessions.  Logical  reasoners  become  apparent  atheists  by 
overthrowing  the  evidence  of  any  theistical  system,  which  means  nothing 
positive ;  for  that  which  overthrows  may  be  overthrown.  It  is  the  particular 
abstract  God  of  this  or  that  philosophy,  or  the  particular  personal  God  of  this 
or  that  theology,  which,  by  its  inherent  defects,  irritates  reason  to  refute  and 
then  to  deny  it.  In  this  case  the  reasoner  may  abide  in  the  negation,  if  he 
be  unable  to  conceive  another  idea  of  Deity  than  the  one  he  refuted,"  and 
be  an  atheist,  but  only  a  negative  one.  Nobody  has  and  none  will  con- 
struct a  positive  evidence  that  the  existence  of  Deity  is  impossible,  hence 
there  is  no  positive  atheist.  I  did  not  count  the  atheists  by  fashion,  that 
are  numerous  in  some  localities,  for  they  are  everything  only  after  a  fash- 
ion, which  is  hardly  worth  while  mentioning.  Anyhow  there  is  nothing 
positive  in  it.  We  return  now  to  our  subject. 

With  this  knowledge  of  Deity,  understood  by  Moses  and  comprehended 
more  or  less  by  the  intelligent  portion  of  the  society  about  him,  we  leave  the 
camp  in  the  wilderness  and  approach  Mount  Sinai.  There  we  hear  Anochi 
Jehovah  Elohecho,  and  we  comprehend  at  once  that  this  Jehovah  is  identical 
with  the  Elohim,  whom  we  know  to  be  the  Creator,  Governor  and  Preserver 
of  the  universe,  the  universal  and  special  Providence  of  the  universe  and  of 
every  creature  thereof,  of  this  and  every  other  nation,  of  this  and  every  other 
individual.  The  very  idea  of  revelation  is,  that  Providence  discloses  its 
secrets  to  man  to  instruct  him,  that  so  the  individual  man  must  live  and  act 
his  part  on  this  stage  of  existence  in  order  to  reap  the  benefit  in  store  for 
him  in  the  bountiful  lap  of  benign  Providence.  So  the  nation,  so  the  nations 
must  live  and  act  their  parts  on  the  stage  of  history,  obedient  to  the  same 
code  of  ethics  as  the  individual,  in  order  to  exist  and  prosper  under  the 
guidance  of  Him  who  shapes  the  ends  and  holds  in  His  hands  the  destinies 
of  the  nations.  If  you,  individual  or  nation,  disregard  and  transgress  the 
law  of  Providence,  you  by  your  own  free  will  place  yourselves  outside  of  it, 
enjoy  no  longer  its  benefits,  hence  you  are  abandoned  to  luck,  chance  and 
casualty,  you  drift  upon  a  boundless  ocean  of  incalculable  emergencies,  and 
sooner  or  later,  the  impetuous  billows  of  crushing  casualties  will  overwhelm 
and  crush  you.  You  rebel  against  Providence  and  you  forfeit  its  protec- 


-  59  - 

tion,  you  rebel  against  sovereign  reason  and  you  are  abandoned  to  folly  and 
absurdity,  the  illogical  combat  between  man  and  physical  nature.  This  is 
the  sense  of  the  twenty-sixth  chapter  of  Leviticus,  the  ever  returning  refrain 
of  which  is,  "If  you  will  go  with  me  in  rebellion,  I  will  go  with  you  in  the 
violence  of  rebellion."  There  are  in  this  world  two  controlling  forces  for 
man,  benign  and  wise  Providence,  unreasonable  and  heartless  casualty; 
obey  the  law  of  Providence  and  live,  abandon  yourselves  to  casualty  and 
perish.  This  is  the  fundamental  idea  of  revelation,  and  history,  with  its 
blood-stained  ruins  and  glory-crowned  palaces,  testifies  to  its  truth.  This  is 
the  doctrine  of  Providence,  which  can  be  defined  and  explained,  analyzed  and 
expounded,  although  nothing  can  be  added  to  it,  nothing  can  be  taken  from 
it.  Calvary  and  Mecca  have  not  changed  it,  the  Reformation  has  not  im- 
proved it,  history  in  all  its  chapters  testifies  to  it,  you  and  I,  all  reviewing 
their  mundane  careers  honestly  and  impartially,  must  confirm  it.  There  is 
a  Providence  whose  laws  must  be  obeyed. 

The  main  question,  however,  in  this  connection  is,  how  does  this  defini- 
tion of  Providence  agree  with  the  principle  of  freedom  which  we  know  to  be 
the  postulate  of  ethics?  Both  being  included  in  the  same  Sinaic  revelation, 
they  can  not  exclude  one  another.  The  next  question  suggesting  itself  is, 
by  what  means  does  Providence  manifest  itself  to  reach  the  human  being  or 
beings?  These  means  must  be  intelligible  to  human  reason  or  else  we  could 
form  no  idea  of  the  workings  of  Providence.  Well  do  we  know  the  word  of 
Scriptures,  "  He  maketh  the  winds  his  messengers,  flaming  fire  his  minis- 
ters," and  the  remark  in  the  Talmud,  "  Providence  hath  many  messengers." 
But  we  also  know  something  about  the  laws  of  nature  and  their  stability e 
It  is  not  so  easy  to  believe  that  a  steamer  with  hundreds  of  people  on  board 
sinks  and  all  of  them  perish,  because  all  of  them  were  sinners,  guilty  unto 
death  ;  or  that  a  large  city  is  destroyed  by  conflagration  or  inundation  on 
account  of  the  sinfulness  of  its  inhabitants ;  or  that  a  man  walking  on  the 
sidewalk  steps  upon  an  orange  peel,  slips,  falls  and  breaks  a  limb  on  ac- 
count of  his  wickedness  ;  or  that  this  man  is  rich  and  happy  on  account  of 
his  merits  and  virtues,  and  the  other  is  poor  and  wretched  on  account  of  his 
sins.  So  the  balance  of  justice,  it  appears,  is  not  so  very  correct  as  opti- 
mists, moralists  and  preachers  maintain.  Well  we  might  say  that  these 
cases  are  exceptions  to  the  rule,  and  the  exceptions  are  very  small,  hardly 
more  than  necessary  to  establish  the  rule  as  such.  But  when  we  speak  of 
special  Providence  in  connection  with  the  goodness  and  wisdom  of  the  Al- 
mighty, it  ought  to  reach  every  case.  Let  us  take  a  closer  survey  of  the 
matter,  perhaps  these  questions  are  answerable. 

In  as  far  as  Providence  signifies  the  act  of  providing  for  the  well  being 
and  prosperity  of  God's  creatures,  the  energies  of  nature  to  produce  abun- 


—  60- 

dantly  foreman  and  beast,  the  instincts  of  those  creatures,  and  especially 
the  reason  of  man  to  seek  and  gather  in,  are  all  sufficient  to  admit  that 
this- is  a  well-provided  world.  The  combat  for  existence,  or  rather  subsist- 
ence, is  an  enormous  bubble,  an  imitation  of  affairs  in  a  badly  managed 
human  society,  which  bursts  at  its  first  contact  with  reality;  for  in  reality 
there  is  plenty  for  all  and  ten  times  more  than  the  living  beings  on  earth 
can  possibly  use.  But  if  we  speak  not  of  that  which  we  must  have,  but  of 
what  we  wish  and  would  like  to  have,  that  which  is  unnecessary  to  our 
well-being;  and  we  find  how  partial  Dame  Fortune  is  in  distributing  her 
favors,  how  one  must  earn  a  bare  livelihood  in  the  sweat  of  his  brow,  while 
this  railroad  king,  that  banker,  this  merchant  prince,  that  cunning  specu- 
lator, this  gambler,  that  robber,  this  swindler,  that  adventurer  spends  hi? 
years  in  frolicking  and  gayety,  we  must  first  accuse  ourselves  who  yearn  for 
things  which  we  do  not  need,  and  then  we  must  find  fault  with  the  organiza- 
tion of  society  which  violates  God's  laws  and  stands  in  rebellion  against  the  will 
of  Providence  to  the  very  extent  to  which  the  cunning  and  successful  indi- 
vidual deprives  the  laboring  man  of  food,  raiment  and  shelter.  There  must 
be  a  crime  in  the  appetites  of  individuals  and  the  government  of  society  in 
exact  proportion  to  the  sufferings  of  a  portion  of  its  members ;  although 
wealth  and  high  living  are  no  conclusive  evidence  of  happiness,  as  poverty 
and  hard  labor  are  no  sure  criteria  of  wretchedness.  There  are  as  many 
happj7  people  in  this  world  subsisting  on  scanty  food,  in  hovels  and  coarse 
garments — yes,  as  many,  and  more  than  there  are  happy  princes  and  mil- 
lionaries.  The  thermometer  with  which  to  gauge  human  happiness  is  of  a 
relative  nature.  The  crime  is  in  society,  if  by  its  inventions  and  contri- 
vances, its  ignorance  and  levity,  accidents  occur  which  cost  the  lives  or 
health  of  human  beings.  Providence  is  correct  and  faultless ;  society  is 
guilty  of  criminal  neglect  and  ignorance.  If  we  want  to  enjoy  the  advan- 
tages and  benefits  of  our  own  inventions  and  ingenuity,  which  are  the  pro- 
ducts of  our  own  free  will  and  reason,  we  must  also  take  the  risk  of  the  mis- 
takes and  errors  to  which  we  are  liable,  and  stand  the  consequences  with- 
out an  appeal  to  the  mercy  of  Providence.  In  physical  nature  the  laws  of 
God  are  stable;  man  is  gifted  with  reason  and  free  will  to  know  and 
use  them  to  his  advantage  and  prosperity,  or  misuse  them  to  his  own 
misery  and  destruction.  The  law  of  God  is,  reason  correctly  and  act  in- 
telligently. This  leads  us  into  the  modus  operandi  of  Providence. 

Notwithstanding  all  this  and  all  that,  there  is  a  special  Providence,  and 
one  which  does  not  conflict  with  man's  freedom.  History  testifies  to  the  reign 
of  universal  Providence  which  shapes  the  destinies  of  nations,  and  nations 
consist  of  individuals ;  hence  he  who  takes  care  of  nations  must  also  take 
care  of  the  individuals  thereof.  We  must,  in  order  to  understand  it,  bear 


-  61  - 

in  mind  our  definition  of  the  term,  which  is  taken  from  the  words  of  the 
prophet  Micha  (vi.  8).  Dogmatic  speculations  have  led  many  away  from 
plain  truth,  and  prevented  them  from  understanding  the  plainest  statement. 
So  when  they  say  God  is  almighty,  they  define,  "  He  can  do  what  he 
wishes."  You  ask  them,  can  God  commit  a  folly?  can  God  do  the  impos- 
sible? can  He  make  any  fact  undone?  and  they  must  say  no,  and  no  again. 
Therefore,  almighty  signifies,  God  is  the  efficient  cause  of  all  beings,  hence 
he  possesses  all  the  might;  omniscience  signifies,  God  knows  all  causes 
and  their  efficacy  in  the  universe,  and  he  is  all-wise  signifies,  all  conse- 
quences and  all  results  of  all  efficient  causes  are  evident  to  him.  When 
we  say  God  is  omniscient  it  does  not  exclude  the  freedom  of  man,  because 
the  category  of  the  probable  is  evidently  not  included  in  God's  omnis- 
cience. If  that  carpenter  ascends  a  rotten  ladder  to  reach  the  roof,  and 
the  ladder  breaks  and  the  man  sustains  injuries,  God's  knowledge  is  not 
increased  by  that  fact,  which  adds  nothing  to  the  contents  of  intelligence  or 
reason.  Where  the  law  is  known,  single  facts  falling  under  that  law  do  not 
increase  the  knowledge ;  hence  it  is  not  necessary  that  God,  because  He  is 
perfect,  should  have  the  prescience  of  all  particular  occurrences  within  the 
bounds  of  probability,  when  He  knows  the  totality  of  all  possible  proba- 
bilities. All  discussions  of  God's  prescience  and  man's  freedom  appear  to 
have  started  from  an  erroneous  conception  of  the  two  terms. 

If  the  province  of  probability  is  in  the  power  of  man,  he  is  free,  and 
there  it  must  be  where  God's  special  Providence  is  manifested.  None, 
to  my  knowledge,  has  explained  this  point  more  clearly  than  Moses  Mai- 
monides.  With  Aristotle  and  the  Peripatetics  he  admits  that  the  laws  of 
nature  are  the  laws  of  Providence,  which  God  changes  not,  because  they 
are  the  perfect  expressions  of  His  will,  wisdom  and  goodness,  although  He 
may  momentarily  interfere  with  them  for  the  purpose  of  realizing  particular 
aims  in  correspondence  with  His  wisdom  and  goodness,  for  God  is  free. 
His  law  is  his  Providence  in  the  realm  of  nature.  The  spirit  of  man,  how- 
ever, follows  other  laws,  for  the  spirit  is  also  free,  and  must  be  guided  by 
other  inherent  laws.  Hence  God's  special  Providence  exercises  its  influ- 
ence in  and  through  the  spirit  of  man,  as  in  the  case  of  prophecy.  As  we 
stand  physically  in  perpetual  connection  with  this  material  world,  so  we 
stand  spiritually  in  perpetual  connection  with  the  eternal  spirit.  Again  as 
we  are  at  liberty  to  increase  or  decrease  our  natural  health  and  vigor,  and 
become  a  better  or  worse  receptacle  for  the  benevolent  influences  of  physical 
nature,  or  even  reduce  ourselves  to  a  non-conductor  and  death ;  so  in  the 
spiritual  realm  we  may  elevate  our  spiritual  nature  by  obedience  to  God's 
laws  to  the  very  height  of  human  perfection,  which  we  call  nearness  unto 
God,  and  so  we  may  may  degrade  our  spiritual  nature  by  disobedience  and 


—  62  — 

rebellion  to  God's  law  to  the  low,  and  even  the  lowest  condition,  and  be 
thus  distant  from  the  eternal  Deity.  Those  who  are  near  to  God  are  bet- 
ter receptacles  for  the  divine  influence  than  those  at  a  distance.  Special 
Providence  is  identical  with  that  influence  upon  the  human  mind,  only 
that  the  better  man  conceives  it  better,  and  is  thus  partly  rewarded  for  his 
goodness,  and  the  evil-doer  with  the  clogged  reason  and  hardened  heart 
conceives  it  more  slowly  or  not  at  all,  and  is  thus  partly  punished  for  his  wick- 
edness. It  is  through,  and  by  the  reason  and  mind  of  man  that  special 
Providence  protects  and  guides  hirn  without  an}r  interference  with  his  free- 
dom, he  being  governed  by  his  own  inherent  law. 

If  you  wish  to  stand  under  the  special  protection  of  special  Providence 
you  must  exert  your  energies  to  rise,  to  climb,  to  ascend  and  come  as  near 
to  your  God  as  you  can,  and  conceiye  with  ease  the  advice  and  counsel  ot 
the  Ruler  of  man.  If  you  neglect  this,  you  expose  yourselves  to  the  freaks 
of  casualty  and  the  crushing  wheels  of  fatalities.  This  is  the  eternal  law, 
in  perfect  harmony  with  freedom  and  co  ordination  with  the  entire  law  of 
God.  This  is  the  doctrine  of  special  Providence  as  proclaimed  in  the 
Sinaic  revelation,  to  which  nothing  can  be  added,  nothing  taken  away. 
This  is  the  dogma  of  perfect  harmony,  of  Providence  and  freedom 
which  I  have  proposed  to  discuss  this  evening,  and  I  am  done.  There  is 
yet  left  to  consider  the  nature  of  sin  and  atonement  in  connection  with 
this  dogma,  which  I  propose  to  discuss  in  another  lecture. 


X. 

SIN  AND  ATONEMENT. 

The  standard  of  rectitude  is  in  human  reason.  That  which  we  call  con- 
science is  an  instinctive  feeling  of  the  human  species  that  whatever  is  right 
ought  to  be  done  and  whatever  is  wrong  ought  to  be  shunned,  in  consequence 
thereof  righteousness  is  the  cause  of  man's  satisfaction  and  pleasure,  and 
evil-doing  is  to  him  a  source  of  dissatisfaction  and  pain.  Conscience  is, 
therefore,  a  universal  human  disposition,  a  characteristic  which  distin- 
guishes him  from  the  animal.  Brutes  have  no  conscience  either  in  the  des- 
erts or  forests  of  their  original  homes,  or  in  their  third  and  fourth  generations 
in  the  zoological  gardens,  or  in  the  farmers'  stables.  Among  the  lowest 
types  of  inferior  races  of  men,  the  tenor  note  of  conscience  is  discernible, 
although  the  conceptions  of  right  and  wrong  differ  widely  among  races,  na- 
tions, tribes  and  individuals,  because  the  definition  thereof  is  the  function 
and  office  of  reason,  which,  being  free,  naturally  varies,  as  the  results  of  dis- 
cursive reasoning  generally  do.  This,  however,  does  not  affect  the  being  of 
that  innate  disposition  and  feeling  which  we  call  conscience.  It  is  there 
universally,  so  that  no  savage  will  maintain  that  he  ought  to  do  that  which 
is  wrong  and  shun  that  which  is  right  in  his  consciousness.  The  cause  then 
of  the  savage's  low  standard  of  morals  is  in  the  imperfect  functions  of  his 
reason.  As  it  is  in  the  lowest  stage  of  human  development,  so  it  must  be 
in  the  highest  and  every  intermediate  stage,  the  primary  cause  is  in  con- 
science and  the  standard  of  rectitude  is  in  human  reason.  For  rectitude  is 
the  desire  and  determination  to  do  that  which  reason  decides  to  be  right, 
and  not  to  do  the  contrary  thereof.  The  rabbis  maintained,  Ain  Am-ha- 
Aretz  Chasid,  <k  the  ignorant  could  not  be  a  pious  man,"  because  his  standard 
of  rectitude  must  be  as  deficient  as  his  reasoning.  Jesus  maintained  that 
all  sins  may  be  forgiven  except  sins  against  the  Holy  Ghost,  which,  in  the 
phraseology  of  those  days,  signifies  the  determined  resistance  against  the 
enlightenment  and  correction  of  the  reasoning  facult}^.  Human  reason  in 
its  state  of  perfection  is  the  Holy  Ghost  of  Christian  and  the  Ruach  hak- 
Kodesh  of  Jewish  theology. 

Imagine,  now,  that  the  souls  of  all  shades  of  enlightenment  be  placed  be. 


—  64  — 

fore  the  throne  of  sovereign  justice  occupied  by  the  Omniscient  Judge,  who 
knows  all  doings  of  man  and  all  motives  thereof,  all  opportunities  and  fa- 
cilities together  with  all  hinderances  and  obstructions  on  man's  path  of  life, 
and  appeal  to  your  reason  for  a  decision,  how  must  that  Sovereign  judge 
every  one  of  those  souls?  The  only  proper  decision,  I  think,  must  be  that 
He  judges  every  one  according  to  his  own  standard  of  rectitude,  in  strict 
accordance  with  every  man's  conscience  and  consciousness,  as  said  the 
prophet  Jeremiah  (xxxii.  19),  and  as  in  fact  all  prophets  said,  which  led 
Rabbi  Joshua  ben  Chananiah,  another  of  the  numerous  Jesuses  of  that  very 
age,  in  behalf  of  Israel  to  protest  against  the  human  arrogance  of  sectaries, 
who  carry  their  intolerance  into  Heaven  and  impose  it  upon  the  eternal 
Deity,  and  to  advance  the  idea  which  was  formulated  thus :  Chasidai 
Ummoth  ha-Olam  yesh  lahem  Chelek  Volam  habba:  "  Pious  Gentiles  (heath- 
ens, infidels,  anybody)  partake  of  life  and  bliss  eternal."  God  judges  every 
man  according  to  his  own  standard  of  rectitude.  The  savage  is  right  if  his 
doings  and  omissions  are  in  full  accordance  with  his  own  standard  of  recti- 
tude. The  Jew,  the  Christian,  the  Mohammedan  and  every  other  man  is 
right,  if  his  doings  and  omissions  are  the  dicta  of  his  standard  of  rectitude. 
This  piece  of  common  sense,  I  believe,  is  generally  admitted,  except  in  the 
vulgar  theology,  although  it  is  held  that  ignorance  of  the  law  is  no  excuse 
for  crime.  This  is  because  we  have  a  right  to  expect  of  every  man  in  society 
to  know  the  Ten  Commandments,  and  crime  actually  signifies  the  transgres- 
sion of  any  provision  thereof.  Ignorance  is  the  original  sin  and  stupidity 
the  universal  depravity,  of  which  man  must  be  redeemed.  But  this  leads 
us  to  another  point  which  we  must  premise. 

The  progress  and  happiness  of  society,  hence  also  of  every  individual 
thereof,  depends  on  the  proximate  perfection  of  the  standard  of  rectitude. 
The  proportion  of  happiness  to  that  standard  is  believed  to  be  exact.  Man's 
innate  yearning  after  happiness  in  connection  with  his  conscience,  the  neg- 
ative of  which  is  his  dread  of  pain,  naturally  prompts  him  to  seek  a  higher 
or  rather  the  highest  standard  of  rectitude  within  his  reach.  It  prompts 
his  reason  to  seek  the  best  and  most  reliable  definitions  of  right  and  wrong. 
He  seeks  enlightenment  for  the  sake  of  happiness.  He  longs  after  certainty 
to  form  his  character  and  govern  his  volitions,  to  be  sure  of  his  being  right 
before  God  and  man.  This  is  perhaps  the  noblest  instinct  of  man  and  the 
best  he  can  do,  as  none  can  reach  perfection.  To  resist  and  neglect  this  in- 
stinct is  a  sin  against  human  nature.  It  is  spiritual  suicide.  ,  Man  is  free, 
he  may  commit  suicide,  something  which  no  animal  can  do;  so  may  he  suf- 
focate in  his  soul  also  this  purely  human  instinct  and  linger  at  the  verge  of 
self-dereliction.  We  are  now  prepared  to  define  righteousnes.  Right- 
eousness is  the  ability  or  state  of  man  to  live  and  act  in  exact  conformity 


—  65  — 

with  the  highest  standard  of  rectitude  within  his  reach.  The  next  and 
highest  step  of  moral  perfection  is  'called  holiness,  which  consists  of  delight 
in  the  good  and  true  and  repugnance  to  their  opposite.  The  Sinaic  revela- 
tion is  premised  with  tb.3  divine  promise,  "  And  ye  shall  be  unto  m3  a  king- 
dom of  priests  and  a  HOLY  nation, "  as  the  effect  to  be  produced  by  the 
revelation.  This  is  repeated  by  Moses  especially  in  three  passages  (Leviti- 
cus xix.  2:  xx.  26;  xi.  44),  to  impress  on  the  mind  that  personal  holiness 
is  one  of  the  great  objects  of  the  Sinaic  revelation,  holiness  by  rectitude, 
by  righteousness  and  by  physical  purity. 

In  his  search  after  the  standard  of  righteousness  man  encounters  the 
difficulty  of  uncertainty.  I  do  not  know  all,  nor  do  I  know  best.  Many  men 
and  certainly  all  men  know  more  and  better  than  I  do.  How,  then,  shall 
I  know  that  I  have  fixed  for  myself  the  best  standard  of  righteousness? 
No  man  of  sound  sense  will  deny  this,  hence  every  one  must  remain  in  a  state 
of  uncertainty  on  this  important  point.  He  appeals  to  human  reason,  to 
the  experience  of  mankind  crystalized  in  the  religious  and  moral  literatures  of 
the  world  and  in  the  laws  of  the  different  nations ;  he  becomes  more  learned 
but  not  much  wiser,  for  as  in  moial  philosophy  so  in  the  laws  the  differ- 
ence of  principles  is  so  marked  that  none  can  form  from  them  a  sure 
standard  of  righteousness,  one  which  is  certainly  the  highest  within  human 
reach.  Therefore,  Moses  said  to  his  people  that  the  highest  standard  of 
righteousness,  which  will  eventually  lead  you  to  holiness,  to  be  a  holy  peo- 
ple, and  the  only  one  in  which  there  is  certainty  on  which  you  can  rely, 
is  not  of  human  origin ;  it  is  in  the  Sinaic  revelation  which  comes  to  you 
from  the  highest  and  immutable  authority.  Therefore,  every  honest  and 
reasoning  man,  seeking  the  highest  standard  of  righteousness,  to  form  his 
character  and  to  govern  his  volitions,  so  as  to  be  right  before  God  and  man, 
will  certainly  seek  it  first  and  foremost  in  the  sources  of  his  religion,  which 
he  believes  to  be  of  divine  origin.  And  if  he  succeeds  not  in  finding  it 
there,  no  all-just  God  can  punish  him  for  non-fulfillment  of  duty.  There- 
fore, those  ancient  sages  maintained  that  "  Pious  Gentiles  partake  of  life 
and  bliss  eternal." 

Please,  ladies  and  gentlemen,  permit  me  to  interrupt  this  subject  by  a 
petition  to  those  venerable  men,  who  preach  such  a  superabundance  of 
Christian  love  for  so  little  compensation,  a  petition  in  behalf  of  Jews  and 
Gentiles,  of  four-fifths  of  the  human  family.  Let  me  pray  to  them  thus  : 
Please  let  us  have  a  share  in  God's  grace,  do  not  exclude  us  from  the 
Father's  house,  do  not  monopolize  altogether  the  love  of  Him  who 
said,  "  I  love  you,  saith  Jehovah  " ;  let  us  have  some  corner  in  Heaven, 
do  not  send  us  all  in  corpore  to  that  bad  pl^ce.  Please  do  not  prolong 


—  66  — 

your  line  of  intolerance  to  Heaven  and  eternity ;  it  looks  too  unkind 
and  too  arrogant  for  any  little  man  to  degrade  God  to  an  arbitrary 
despot.  If  you  do  it  not  for  the  sake  of  the  Father,  do  it  for  the  sake  of 
the  Son,  that  he  appear  not  so  much  smaller  than  that  rabbi  who  form- 
ulated the  Jewish  doctrine,  "  Pious  Gentiles  partake  of  life  and  bliss 
eternal.  "  And  if  you  refuse  to  let  us  poor  creatures  go  to  Heaven,  please 
let  us  live  in  peace  here  on  earth.  Do  not  flatter  your  customers  that  they 
are  better  men  and  better  women  than  we  are,  because  they  believe  in  your 
extra  doctrines,  when  the  next  moment  you  confess  that  they  are  all  sin- 
ners after  all.  I  will  stop  here  and  return  to  our  subject. 

After  what  we  have  said,  it  will  be  easy  to  define  the  term  sin.  The  Si- 
naic  revelation,  building  upon  the  postulate  of  freedom,  admits  that  man 
may  sin.  It  mentions  three  kinds  of  sin.  For  a  sinner  is  he  who  is  first 
wrong  in  his  motives  (Avon),  secondly  wrong  in  his  action  (Pesha),  and 
thirdly  wrong  in  the  end  or  aim  of  his  action  (Chatta'oh).  There  are  the 
very  three  terms  in  the  revelation  supplementary  to  the  Sinaic  (Exodus 
xxxiv.  7),  and  explanatory  of  one  of  its  provisions.  (Ibid.  xx.  5.)  We 
may  say,  then,  according  to  the  Sinaic  revelation,  that  man  is  a  sinner 
.whose  actions  are  prompted  by  evil  motives,  or  whose  actions  are  violations 
of  his  own  acknowledged  law  of  God  according  to  his  standard  of  right- 
eousness, or  also  whose  actions  are  productive  of  evil  to  others  or  even  to 
himself.  Wherever  these  three  kinds  of  sin  are  combined  in  one  action  it 
is  a  crime.  God  punishes  or  forgives  sins,  and  the  Law  punishes  crimes. 
A  sin,  according  to  rabbinical  definition,  must  be  an  action.  The  evil 
thought,  some  of  them  "maintain,  being  actually  negative  only,  as  for  in- 
stance unbelief,  is  not  punishable  with  God,  while  the  good  thought,  which 
is  actually  positive,  is  counted  with  the  good  deed.  However,  the  Sinaic 
revelation  ordains,  "  Thou  shalt  not  covet, "  hence  evil  thoughts  are 
identical  with  evil  actions. 

A  person  is  not  a  sinner,  because  he  committed  one  or  more  sins  at  dif- 
ferent times,  as  is  stated  explicitly  in  Ecclesiastes  (vii.  16-20).  That  writer 
comes  to  the  conclusion  that  no  Tzaddik,  no  righteous  man,  is  without  his 
sins.  He  becomes  a  Rasha,  "  a  wicked  man,"  if  his  general.character  is 
more  inclined  to  acts  of  violence,  sensuality  and  selfishness  than  to  the 
right  and  good.  So  King  David  defines  the  term  Rasha  (Psalms  xxxiv. 
2-5;  1.  16-20) ;  so  the  rabbis  of  the  Talmud  and  after  them  Maimonides  in 
the  code  (Teshubah)  understood  it.  We  are,  therefore,  warranted  in  main- 
taining that  he  is  a  righteous  man,  Tzaddik,  whose  general  character  is 
formed  and  established  in  conformity  with  the  highest  standard  of  rectitude 
within  his  reach.  The  opposite  thereof,  i.  e.,  who  seeks  no  standard  of  rec- 


-  67  - 

titude  and  cares  for  none,  or  he  who  has  one  and  is  not  guided  by  it  is  a 
wicked  man,  Rasha. 

It  is  evident  from  the  Sinaic  revelation  that  God  forgives  sins ;  because  it 
is  stated  in  only  one  particular  case  that  God  will  not  hold  him  guiltless 
who  takes  His  name  in  vain,  and  it  is  plainly  stated  in  the  supplementary 
revelation  (Exodus  xxxiv.  7),  "  He  forbeareth  (or  forgiveth)  iniquity, trans- 
gression and  sin,"  which  is  frequently  repeated  by  Moses  and  expounded 
by  the  prophets  in  the  plainest  and  most  distinct  language.  It  is  also 
evident  that  none  besides  God  can  forgive  sins,  so  we  read  (Ibid,  xxiii.  20, 
21)  that  the  angel,  messenger  or  prophet  whom  God  promised  to  send  be- 
fore Israel  in  order  to  bring  him  to  the  land  of  promise,  would  not  forgive 
their  transgressions,  although  God's  name  or  special  authority  was  in  him, 
which  says  plainly  enough  that  this  authority  is  delegated  to  none.  Man  is 
responsible  to  God  and  the  law.  Either  of  them  may  punish  him  for  his 
misdeeds,  and  God  alone  can  forgive  them.  Only  in  one  case,  it  is  said  in 
the  Decalogue,  that  God  visits  the  iniquity  of  parents  upon  children  to  the 
third  and  fourth  generations,  and  that  is,  as  all  Jewish  expounders  under- 
stood it,  the  iniquity  of  idolatry  in  him  who  knows  that  there  is  but  one 
God,  and  from  wicked  motives  worships  others.  Maimonides  adds  thereto 
that  such  a  wickedness  rooted  in  the  head  of  a  family,  it  may  be 
supposed,  will  corrupt  the  whole  of  it.  The  third  and  fourth  genera- 
tions are  mentioned,  because,  as  in  the  case  of  Joseph  (Genesis  1.  23j,  so 
long  a  man  might  live  and  exercise  that  nugatory  influence  upon  his 
family. 

The  principle,  however,  expressed  in  that  part  of  the  revelation  appears 
to  be,  that  the  good  and  the  true  is  imperishable  in  the  history  of  the  race ; 
it  bears  perpetual  fruit  and  perishes  not  in  the  memory  of  man ;  while  all 
that  is  evil  and  false  is  doomed  to  perish  in  the  next  generation  or  in  the 
third  and  fourth.  This  is  a  law  of  history  as  well  as  of  revelation,  well 
understood  by  the  inspired  men  and  the  expounders  of  their  words. 

Everlasting  punishment,  eternal  torments,  the  unquenched  fire  of  hell, 
spiced  with  a  dose  of  brimstone,  and  surrounded  by  a  few  teasing  and  tri- 
umphant devils,  are  the  products  of  a  rude  northern  imagination;  the 
Sinaic  revelation  makes  no  suggestion  of  that  kind.  The  whole  is  the  pro- 
duct of  a  false  speculation,  a  reasoning  not  from  facts,  but  from  prior  con- 
clusions. If  sin  means  rebellion  against  the  eternal  God,  its  effect  in 
Him  must  be  eternal  as  He  himself  is,  consequently  the  punishment 
must  be  also  eternal.  This  is  the  foundation  of  that  doctrine.  But  man's 
doings  and  omissions  can  only  affect  him  and  other  men.  They  can  no  more 
affect  God  than  I  can  affect  the  solar  system  by  striking  a  blow  upon  a  rock. 
God  is  perfect  and  immutable ;  man's  doings  and  omissions  can  produce 


—  68  — 

no  change  in  Him.  The  Sinaic  revelation  speaks  of  a  punishment  to  the 
third  or  fourth  generations  only;  all  prophets  and  all  history  confirm  this ; 
hence  theologians  had  no  right  to  invent  that  terrifying  doctrine  in  order 
to  frighten  ignorant  people  into  the  lap  of  the  Church,  or  to  use  it  as  a  scare- 
crow for  bearded  children. 

The  means  of  atonement  also  are  fully  delineated  in  the  Sinaic  revela- 
tion. The  people  coming  out  of  Egypt  are  considered  to  be  in  a  state  of 
sinfulness.  (Psalms  Ixxviii.  22.)  Moses  announces  to  them  the  command 
of  God,  to  prepare  by  various  actions  of  sanctification  for  the  great  event, 
u  For  on  the  third  day  God  will  descend  upon  Mount  Sinai  in  the  sight  of 
all  the  people."  And  the  people  did  prepare  as  commanded.  Prepare  for 
what?  To  find  and  understand  the  loftiest  and  surest  standard  of  rectitude. 
This  is  certainly  the  first  step  toward  atonement,  to  prepare  for  the  highest 
standard  of  rectitude  within  our  reach ;  to  feel  convinced  that  we  did  not 
know  hence,  did  not  do  right  in  the  past,  which  arouses  in  every  just  man's 
heart  sorrow,  repentance  and  remorse,  the  hell  fire  in  the  human  breast ; 
and  to  long  and  yearn  for  higher  and  better  knowledge. 

And  when  the  Israelites  had  received  that  highest  standard  of  rectitude, 
they  exclaimed  :]  Na'aseh  Veniish'ma — "  We  will  do  and  will  obey."  ThiH 
is  the  second  step  toward  atonement,  viz,  now.  that  we  are  acquainted  with 
the  highest  and  surest  standard  of  rectitude,  we  resolve  and  determine  that 
we  will  be  guided  by  it.  So  man  returns  to  his  God,  so  he  obliterates  his 
own  sins,  so  he  changes  and  reforms  his  character,  so  he  rises  to  the  dignity 
of  manhood  and  enables  himself  to  counterpoise  and  overbalance  every 
misdeed  of  his  by  noble,  generous  and  humane  deeds ;  to  extinguish  the 
evil  and  replace  it  manifold  by  the  happiness  he  brings  to  weeping  human- 
ity and  to  himself  through  others.  This  is  the  Sinaic  system  of  atone- 
ment, corroborated  by  human  reason  and  the  facts  of  history  and  repeated 
by  the  prophets  of  Israel,  especially  by  Isaiah  (Iv.  4-9)  and  Ezekiel  (xviii.). 
The  means  of  atonement,  be  they  sacrifices  according  to  Moses,  or  prayer, 
fasting  and  alms,  according  to  the  rabbis  and  many  Christian  teachers,  are 
mere  means  to  express  the  repentance,  the  remorse  of  the  sinner,  and  his 
yearning  after  a  higher  standard  of  rectitude  and  the  self-control  to  enable 
him  to  do  right  and  to  be  right  before  God  and  man.  The  means  change 
as  man  and  his  habits  change,  while  the  principle  abides  and  endures  for- 
ever. All  dogmatic  speculations  and  casuistic  ordinances  are  worthless,  if 
they  run  contrary  to  the  principle,  and  are,  in  fact,  but  means  for  the  time 
being. 

We  can  not  say  that  this  exposition  of  doctrine  concerning  sin  and 
atonement  is  one  of  our  Agreements  or  Disagreements,  for  many  Christian 
sects  believe  this  doctrine,  and  only  express  it  in  other  words  and  symbols, 


—  69  — 

such  as  savior,  baptism,  faith,  love,  regeneration,  second  birth,  and  such 
other  theological  fictions,  symbols  to  suggest  ideas ;  while  quite  a  number 
of  Jews  have  re?ort  to  ascetic  practices,  like  those  Christians  who  kill  or 
deaden  the  flesh,  or  the  Hindoos  who  do  it  in  fact,  in  order  to  appease  the 
angry  God  and  obtain  of  him  atonement.  One  thing  we  know  to  a  cer- 
tainty, that  this  doctrine  harmonizes  with  reason  and  is  of  Sinaic  origin; 
hence,  it  rests  upon  the  solid  basis  upon  which  no  other  fabric  of  salvation 
is  built.  It  harmonizes  with  man's  freedom,  with  the  universal  plan  of 
Providence,  with  the  goodness  and  justice  of  God;  therefore,  we  believe 
in  it. 


XI. 
IMMORTALITY  AND  SINAI. 

The  belief  in  the  immortality  of  man's  individuality  or  personality  in 
any  of  the  three  forms  of  resurrection  of  the  body,  immortality  of  the  soul, 
or  both  forms  united,  or  transmigration  of  souls,  connected  with  the  idea  of 
future  reward  or  punishment  or  both,  is  so  universal  in  the  human  family 
that  a  modern  writer  in  Germany  (Dcr  Seelencult  von  Julius  Lippert),  with 
no  small  amount  of  learning,  has  attempted  to  prove  by  facts  that  man's 
belief  in  God  or  gods  is  based  upon  his  prior  belief  in  the  immortality  of 
the  soul.  The  worship  of  departed  ancestors,  the  attempts  to  please  and 
win  the  favor  of  the  good,  to  appease  or  banish  the  evil  spirits,  he  thinks, 
led  to  the  worship  of  God  or  the  gods.  Without  attempting  here  any 
criticism  on  that  theory,  it  must  be  admitted  from  the  material  compiled  in 
its  support,  that  the  Grecian  and  Roman  classical  writers,  who  maintain 
that  ancient  Egypt  was  the  country  where  the  doctrine  of  personal  immor- 
tality was  first  advanced  and  taught,  were  mistaken.  They  had  no  knowl- 
edge of  the  religions  of  China  and  India,  none  of  the  tribes  and  nations 
preceding  the  ancient  Empires  of  Babel  and  Nineveh,  of  Syria  and  Pal- 
estine or  of  the  Arabs*  In  fact  their  knowledge  of  man  beyond  Greece  and 
Egypt  did  not  even  reach  far  into  Ethiopia.  Modern  researches  prove  that 
the  idea  of  personal  immortality  was  universal  among  the  ancient  nations 
or  tribes,  whose  theories  and  speculations  have  become  known  to  us;  and 
that  the  origin  thereof  is  in  gray  pre-historical  ages  inaccessible  to  us  now, 
so  that,  perhaps,  none  will  ever  be  able  to  ascertain  where  and  when  it 
originated.  It  appears  to  be  an  innate  consciousness  of  man  that  he  is  an 
immortal  being,  which,  like  the  consciousness  of  freedom,  duty,  account- 
ability and  ideality  in  general,  can  be  cultivated  and  perfected  or  obscured 
and  extinguished  by  development  or  deterioration  of  human  nature. 

It  makes  no  difference,  however,  whether  the  Egyptians  or  all  other  na- 
tions prior  to  Moses  were  in  possession  of  the  belief  in  immortality  ;  it  must 
be  admitted  anyhow  that  Moses  and  his  cotemporaries  must  have  been  in 
possession  thereof;  whether  they  learned  it  in  Egypt  or  their  ancestors 
brought  it  with  them  from  the  land  of  the  Chaldeans.  This  is,  I  think,  ad- 
mitted on  all  hands.  And  yet  this  amounts  to  circumstantial  evidence  only 


—  71  - 

that  the  Hebrews  in  the  time  of  Moses  believed  in  immortality  in  this  or 
that  form.  I  think  that  there  exists  better  evidence  to  this  effect.  Let  us 
approach  it  by  the  way  of  history. 

It  is  not  necessary  to  search  into  the  historic  literature  of  the  Hebrews 
after  Josephus  Flavius,  as  none  doubts  the  existence  of  the  belief  in  per- 
sonal immortality  among  the  Hebrews  subsequent  to  that  time.  Josephus 
narrates  (Antiquities  xviii.  I.  3;  Wars  II.  viii.  11)  that  there  existed  in 
Palestine  in  the  time  of  the  Asmonean  Jonathan,  hence  about  150  B.  C., 
the  three  sects  of  Pharisees,  Sadducees  and  Essenes.  One  point  of  dissen- 
sion among  them  was  the  doctrine  of  immortality.  The  Pharisees  believed 
in  the  resurrection  of  the  body  and  immortality  of  the  soul.  The  Essenes 
believed  in  the  immortality  of  the  soul  only,  with  which,  it  appears,  they 
connected  the  belief  that  good  men  after  death  become  angels  of  different 
degrees,  like  Elijah  who  became  the  Angel  of  the^Covenant  or  Syndelphos,  or 
like  Henoch,  who  became  the  Angel  Metathron,  the  supreme  scribe  in 
Heaven,  or  both  identical  as  the  angel  of  prayer,  mediator  between  God  and 
man,  the  prince  of  the  countenance,  the  prince  of  the  world,  upon  which 
Paul  based  his  Christology :  and  that  the  spirits  of  bad  men  become  evil 
demons,  as  the  belief  was  prevalent  in  the  East,  and  is  still  in  China  and 
elsewhere.  The  Sadducees  did  not  believe  in  resurrection,  says  Josephus, 
although  it  appears  they  had  another  form  of  belief  in  immortality  different 
from  the  two  other  sects,  as  will  be  mentioned  below.  This  record  in 
Josephus  proves  beyond  doubt  that  in  150  B.  C.  the  doctrine  of  immortality 
was  already  so  prevalent  and  old  among  the  Hebrews  that  three  sects 
quarreled  over  the  form  of  the  dogma. 

Advancing  one  step  higher  up  into  antiquity  we  reach  the  Second  Book 
of  the  Maccabees,  which,  being  addressed  to  Aristobul,  the  tutor  of  the 
King  (Ptolemy  Physcos),  must  have  been  written  at  least  two  centuries  be- 
fore Josephus.  We  find  in  this  book  the  martyr  story  of  Hannah  and  her 
seven  sons  (chapter  iv.),  who  die  with  the  firm  conviction  and  faith  in  im- 
mortality and  future  reward,  and  the  same  doctrine  is  forcibly  announced 
and  emphasized  in  many  other  passages  of  the  book.  (II.  Maccabees  iii.  1 ; 
v.  15,  18;  vi.  18;  xii.  43;  xv.  12  and  elsewhere.) 

One  .step  higher,  and  we  reach  that  very  eminent  book,  called  Wisdom 
of  Solomon,  which  is  apocryphal  according  to  Jews  and  Protestants,  and 
canonical  according  to  Catholics.  In  my  opinion  it  was  written  in  Pal- 
estine by  the  same  Aristobul,  as  a  general  introduction  to  his  Commen- 
taries of  the  Bible  which  he  wrote  for  that  Ptolemy.  This  book  is  a  sort  of 
Gospel  of  immortality,  in  which  life  eternal,  future  reward  and  punishment 
are  made  the  rock  and  center  of  ethics  and  the  final  cause  of  this  mundane 
life. 


-  72  — 

One  step  higher  again,  and  we  stand  before  Daniel,  Ecclesiastes  and  Job, 
in  which  no  unprejudiced  reader  can  overlook  the  frequent  expressions 
given  to  the  immortality  doctrine,  reward  and  punishment  hereafter.  Then 
we  come  to  Ezekiel  (chapter  xxxvii.)  and  much  higher  up  to  Isaiah  (chap- 
ters xiv. ;  xxv.  8;  xxvi.  19)  and  to  the  Psalms  (xvii.  and  xlix.),  and  find 
the  doctrine  of  immortality  generally  known,  understood  and  believed  in 
Israel.  The  Books  of  Kings  and  of  Samuel  especially  lead  up  to  David 
and  Samuel  with  perfect  certainty.  The  Witch  of  Endor  could  not  have 
conjured  up  the  spirit  of  Samuel,  and  he  could  not  have  said  to  Saul,  "To- 
morrow thou  and  thy  sons  will  be  with  me,"  if  immortality  was  not  the  gen- 
eral belief  among  the  Israelites.  This  story  leads  us  clear  back  to  the  Law 
of  Moses.  For  the  Witch  of  Endor  is  called  in  the  text  BcCalath  Ob,  Mis- 
tress of  Ob,  or  one  skilled  in  conjuring  up  the  souls  of  the  deceased  to  re- 
veal certain  secrets,  a  mystic  art  which  Saul  had  attempted  to  extinguish 
in  Israel  in  obedience  to  the  Law  of  Moses,  which  prohibits  expressly  and 
emphatically  all  species  of  those  mystic  arts  (Deuteronomy  xvii.  9-11),  one 
of  which  is  communion  with  the  souls  of  the  deceased  or  vulgar  spiritualism. 
Why  should  Moses  have  prohibited  this  mystic  practice,  if  it  w.is  not  preva- 
lent among  his  people ;  and  how  could  such  manipulations  find  credence 
among  the  people,  if  it  did  not  believe  in  personal  immortality  and  con- 
scious existence  after  death? 

Led  back  to  Moses  by  a  historical  chain  and  with  the  circumstantial  evi- 
dence recited  before,  we  find  also  in  the  Pentateuch  quite  a  number  of  pas- 
sages testifying  to  the  prevalence  of  that  belief  in  the  time  of  Moses  and  prior 
thereto.  At  the  very  threshold  of  man's  history,  we  find  in  Genesis  that  man 
was  CREATED  (bara),  as  heaven  and  earth  were  CREATED,  and  as  was  animal 
life.  Only  in  these  three  instances  the  text  speaks  of  creation,  in  all  other 
instances  of  original  production  other  terms  are  used,  such  as  he  said,  he 
made,  or  he  formed.  This  distinguishes  man  as  a  third  and  separate  crea- 
tion. This,  according  to  the  sacred  text,  refers  not  to  the  body  of  man,  which 
was  made  of  the  dust  of  the  ground,  but  to  the  Tzelem,  which  made  of  the 
body  of  clay  a  man.  (Genesis  i.  27.)  "And  Elohim  created  man  by  his 
Tzelem."  This  term  is  defined  in  the  second  chapter  to  be  the  Nishmath 
Chayim  (verse  7),  by  which  the  body  of  clay  became  a  living  man  ;  and  this 
was  a  new  creation.  This  "  Breath  of  Life  "  or  soul  of  life  or  life  soul,  is  not 
a  thing  which  was  dead  or  material  at  any  time.  It  is  not  taken  from  the 
elements  which  might  be  destroyed.  It  is  not  an  organism  which  is  subject 
to  dissolution.  That  Tzelem,  by  which  man  is  in  likeness  with  God,  is  the 
Nishmath  Chayim,  the  life-soul,  blown  into  his  nostrils  by  and  from  the  Al- 
mighty himself;  hence  a  something  which  never  was  dead  and  is  not  sub- 
ject to  the  dominion  of  death.  So  almost  all  Jewish  commentators  understood 


-  73  — 

those  passages  in  Genesis,  which  announced  man  from  the  very  beginning 
as  a  being  consisting  of  a  body  of  clay  and  a  deathless  soul.  Therefore 
they  called  the  soul  Chelelc  Eloha  mim-ma'al,  "  the  portion  of  God  from  on 
high,"  and  like  him  not  subject  to  death,  the  formative  principle  which 
ceases  not  to  exist,  when  the  form  it  produced  be  broken  and  destroyed. 

This  dualism  returns  again  and  again  in  the  Pentateuch.  When  Rachel 
died,  Scripture  narrates,  "  And  it  came  to  pass  when  her  soul  went  away  (or 
out)  when  she  died."  Death  is  described  in  this  case  as  the  departure  of 
the  soul  from  the  body,  not  as  the  end  of  life.  When  Jacob  died  (Genesis 
xlix.  33)  we  are  told  that  "  he  was  gathered  unto  his  people,"  or  he  went  home 
to  his  ancestors,  exactly  as  all  ancient  nations  with  ancestral  cultes  para- 
phrased the  death  of  their  venerated  fathers.  Here  the  idea  of  meeting  his 
ancestors  in  heaven  is  clearly  expressed.  When  Moses  sang,  "This  is  my 
God  and  I  will  adore  Him,  the  God  of  my  fathers  and  I  will  extol  Him  "  (Ex- 
odus xvii.  2),  he  did  certainly  not  mean  the  dead  ancestors,  that  exist  no 
more  and  could  have  no  God ;  he  meant  the  immortal  ancestors  who  live 
under  the  protection  of  Him,  who  was  also  his  God,  as  both  Jesus  of  Naza- 
reth and  Rabbi  Gamaliel  understood  it,  that  He  is  not  the  God  of  the  dead? 
He  is  the  God  of  the  living.  When  that  same  Moses  furthermore  exclaimed 
(Deuteronomy  xxxii.  39),  "  See  now,  that  I,  I  am  He  and  no  Elohim  with 
me ;  I  kill  and  I  enliven,  I  crush  and  I  heal,  and  none  can  deliver  from  my 
hands  ;  for  I  lift  up  my  hand  to  Heaven  (Almighty),  and  I  have  said,  I  live 
forever";  he  could  only  think  of  life  after  death  and  healing  after  being 
crushed  and  added,  therefore,  the  assurance,  that  God  is  almighty  and  life 
eternal.  He  must  have  thought  the  same  when  he  prayed  (Psalms  xc.  3), 
"  Thou  turnest  man  to  dissolution  (not  contrition),  and  sayest,  return  ye  sons 
of  man."  David  based  upon  this  idea  his  beautiful  expression  (Psalms  xvi. 
10),  "  For  thou  abandonest  not  my  soul  to  Sheol,  thou  sufferest  not  thy 
pious  ones  to  see  corruption." 

It  is  one  of  the  errors  of  speculative  theology  that  it  attempted  to  band- 
age the  eyes  of  Scripture  readers,  so  as  not  to  see  how  the  Old  Testament  is 
full  of  expressions  to  prove  beyond  a  doubt  that  man's  personal  immortality 
always  was  in  Israel  a  universal  and  established  belief,  although  neither 
Moses  nor  the  prophets  based  upon  it  their  system  of  ethics  and  divine 
worship,  the  reason  of  which  was  very  plain,  and  was  expressed  by  the 
prophet,  "  No  eye  besides  thine,  0  God,  hath  seen  it,  He  hath  made  it  to 
wait  for  him";  and  the  rabbi  has  expressed  it  thus,  "  Be  not  like  servants 
who  serve  the  master  for  the  sake  of  reward ;  be  like  servants  who  serve  the 
master  not  for  the  sake  of  rew:.rd,  and  let  the  fear  of  Heaven  be  upon  you." 
Base  your  canon  of  ethics  and  worship  upon  the  immortality  foundation, 
and  you  will  soon  discover  that  this  belief,  being  a  belief  and  hope  only,  could 
never  be  &o  firmly  established ?  that  none  could  doubt,  all  know  and  under- 


—  74  — 

stand  it ;  consequently  in  this  case,  all  men  who  fail  to  know  and  believe,  to 
understand  and  comprehend  this  one  fundnmental  doctrine,  lose  their  moral 
hold,  the  very  object  of  all  morality  and  piety ;  and  so  you  destroy  the  very 
canon  of  ethics  and  worship. 

Base  your  canon  of  ethics  and  worship  upon  the  immortality  idea,  and 
you  have  made  of  it  a  system  of  selfishness,  that  is,  you  have  made  morals 
immoral  and  worship,  blasphemy.  You  only  do  what  you  do  and  say  what 
you  say  for  the  wages  you  expect  to  receive.  You  make  of  ethics  a  gar- 
ment to  keep  you  nice  and  warm,  and  of  worship  a  sort,  of  savings  bank  in 
which  to  deposit  your  spare  pennies  for  future  use. 

Base  your  canon  of  ethics  and  worship  upon  the  immortality  doctrine, 
and  you  move  the  center  of  gravity  from  this  into  another  world.  You  make 
of  this  life  a  mere  caravansary,  where  we  stop  a  little  while  to  procure  food  for 
the  long  journey  through  an  unknown  wilderness.  The  consequence  of  such 
a  teaching,  which  none  could  observe  better  than  Moses  could  in  Egypt,  is 
that  men  care  not  for  this  world  and  this  life,  their  fate  and  their  progress, 
and  become  indolent  slaves,  if  the  rig-lit  man  comes  to  subject  them  and 
domineer  over  them.  If  a  man's  interest  is  not  in  this  life  and  this  world,  he, 
of  course,  can  not  care  much  about  either,  and  can  not  possibly  be  such  a 
citizen  of  a  common  wealth  or  such  a  member  of  the  human  family  as  Moses 
proposed  man  should  be,  free,  just,  humane  and  useful. 

After  all,  we  could  not  possibly  know  more  of  life  eternal  than  that  it  is 
a  continuation  of  life  here,  a  prolongation  of  the  same  straight  line,  a  steady 
advancing  from  lower  to  higher  states.  We  can  arrive  there  only  as  we 
prepare  ourselves  here.  No  man  has  a  right  to  expect  more  than  his 
desert.  Justice  can  not  grant  more  and  grace  is  of  the  same  wisdom  with 
justice.  The  object  of  ethics  and  worship  is  to  unfold,  cultivate,  enrich  and 
ennoble  your  soul  in  this  world,  and  to  hope  for  that  world  which  he  has 
made  "  to  wait  for  Him."  Bishop  Warburton  might  have  taken  these  points 
into  consideration. 

Base  your  canon  of  ethics  and  worship  upon  the  simple  foundation  of  the 
elevation,  progress  and  perfection  of  man  and  mankind,  as  Moses  did,  a 
foundation  which  none  can  deny  or  doubt,  and  you  reach  the  proper  end  of 
human  happiness  here  and  hereafter  without  subjecting  your  system  to  the 
objections  just  discussed. 

Theologians  have  so  long  maintained  the  absurdity  that  the  common 
men  repeated  it  thoughtlessly,  and  extended  it  to  all  Hebrews  of  all  ages 
and  zones.  Thus  "the  Jews  believe  in  no  eternal  life."  It  is  strange  that 
the  Jews  themselves  know  nothing  of  that  denial,  as  is  evident  from  what 
we  have  stated  already,  and  becomes  self-evident  from  their  theological  and 
traditional  literatures.  All  Jewish  exegetics,  metaphysicians  and  philoso- 
phers up  to  Philo  and  Aristobul,  of  Alexandria,  up  even  to  the  translators 


-  75  - 

of  the  Septuagint,  maintain  and  expound  the  doctrine  of  immortality  as 
purely  Jewish  doctrine.  Again  all  traditional  and  rabbinical  writings,  from 
beginning  to  end,  represent  the  belief  in  future  life,  reward  and  punishment 
as  a  doctrine  of  Jewish  revelation.  In  the  Talmud  and  its  preceding  books, 
as  well,  as  in  every  catechism,  this  belief  is  announced  and  emphasized. 
Hundreds  and  thousands  of  books  on  this  subject,  some  full  of  absurd  super- 
stitions, have  been  written  on  the  subject.  The  Kabbalists  and  mystics  have 
depicted  heaven  and  hell  in  as  lively  a  manner  as  the  most  successful  Meth- 
odist preacher,  only  with  a  little  more  Oriental  imaginatian.  The  Jewish 
prayer  books  are  full  of  it,  and  the  principal  and  simplest  one  of  all,  the 
Mechalkel  Chayim  of  the  Daily  Prayers,  "  Thou  sustainest  the  living  in  grace, 
thou  revivest  the  dead  in  abundant  mercy," etc,  is  believed  to  have  been 
composed  by  the  men  of  the  Great  Synod  in  the  time  of  Ezra.  The  very 
fact  that  Jesus  and  his  apostles  taught  the  doctrine  of  immortality  in  the 
same  form  as  the  Pharisees  did,  ought  to  be  proof  positive  that  a  belief  in 
immortality  was  in  Israel  prior  to  the  advent  of  Jesus;  or  rather  he  would 
not  have  taught  immortality  if  he  had  not  found  it  in  Israel. 

The  most  telling,  perhaps,  and  also  the  strangest  passage  in  this  connec- 
tion is  that  ancient  Mishnah  in  Sanhedrin,  "  And  these  are  the  persons  who 
have  no  share  in  life  to  come,  he  who  denies  that  the  resurrection  of  the 
dead  is  taught  in  the  Thorah,  who  maintains  there  is  no  Tfiorah  from 
Heaven,  and  the  Epicurean.  This  points  to  the  person  who  denies  resur- 
rection, revelation,  and  the  existence  of  Deity,  as  did  the  Epicurean?.  But 
it  says,  besides,  that  one  must  believe,  immortality  or  resurrection  is  taught 
in  the  Thorah,  by  Moses,  we  might  say,  and  this  is  the  strange  point  in  that 
passage.  It  shows  that  all  Jews,  or  at  least  all  Pharisees  and  Essenes,  be- 
lieved that  Moses  did  teach  immortality;  against  which,  and  not  perhaps 
against  immortality  itself  the  Sadducees  protested.  The  word  "  Epicu- 
reans'' for  atheists  point  back  to  the  time  before  the  Maccabees,  to  the 
dissensions  between  Hassidim  and  Grecians  when  Epicureans  existed  in 
Israel.  The  other  part  of  the  passage  also  points  to  that  time,  when  revela- 
tion was  denied  and  immortality  was  believed  on  the  authority  of  Socrates, 
Plato  and  other  philosopher?,  but  not  on  the  authority  of  revelation.  This 
is  partly  corroborated  by  a  well-known  passage  in  Aboth  of  Rabbi  Nathan, 
which  brings  up  the  schism  of  the  Sadducees  among  the  doctors  up  to  the 
school  of  Antigonos,  hence  to  the  first  half 'of  the  third  ante-Christian  cen- 
tury, after  it  may  have  been  an  old  question  among  all  other  classes  of 
people. 

Jesus  knew  this  doctrine  and  adhered  to  it.  When  the  Sadducees  asked 
him  that  known  question  about  the  future  world,  he  answered  them  in  go  d 
Pharisean  language,  that  in  the  future  world  men  will  have  nq  physical 
bodies,  no  corporeal  passions,  no  bodily  wants.  "  The  righteous  will  sit 


-  76- 

with  their  crowns  upon  their  heads  and  enjoy  the  splendor  of  the  She- 
kinah,"  the  Pharisees  add.  But  after  Jesus  had  fully  answered  the  ques- 
tion of  the  Sadducees,  he  continues  to  prove  this  doctrine  horailetically 
from  a  passage  in  the  Thorah  (Matthew  xxii.  31,  32),  exactly  as  Rabbi 
Gamliel  did.  Why  this  second  and  superfluous  explanation?  He  wanted 
to  prove  that  immortality  or  resurrection  is  taught  in  the  Thorah,  by  Moses 
we  might  say,  as  all  orthdox  Israelites  then  believed. 

Where  and  how  is  it  taught  in  the  Thorah  f  That  Mishnah  passage  an- 
swers the  question  in  full.  Why  does  one  deny  resurrection  or  immortality 
in  the  Thorah?  Because  he  denies  divine  revelation.  Why  does  he  deny 
this?  Because  he  denies  God.  The  three  ideas  are  logically  connected  and 
arranged  in  that  Mishnah.  Invert  the  order  and  you  must  say,  he  who  be- 
lieves in  God  and  in  divine  revelation,  must  necessarily  also  believe  in  the 
personal  immortality  of  man  as  being  announced  in  that  very  Thorah.  The 
fact  that  the  eternal  God  revealed  His  will  to  man,  is  the  guarantee  and 
proof  of  his  immortality.  Imperishable  wisdom  can  not  be  addressed  to 
perishable  nature,  as  little  as  man  can  teach  moral  philosophy  or  theology 
to  the  dumb  animal,  although  it  may  understand  articulate  sounds.  The 
spirit  only  can  understand  the  spirit,  and  the  spirit  can  not  perish,  since  it 
is  of  God,  and  not  of  matter;  it  is  simple  and  not  organic,  hence  not  sub- 
ject to  dissolution.  The  Sinaic  revelation  is  the  Thorah  in  which  immor- 
tality or  resurrection  is  taught  by  divine  authority  to  all  Israel,  which  was 
to  demonstrate  that  all  are  immortal  beings,  and  not  the  select  ones,  as  was 
the  belief  in  Egypt,  India.  Athens  and  Rome;  all  are  God's  children,  born 
and  destined  for  immortality.  Therefore,  after  the  Sinaic  revelation  the 
people  exclaimed,  "  This  day  we  have  seen  that  God  speaketh  to  man,  and 
he  liveth  "  (Deut.  v.  11),  he  is  immortal,  for  he  can  understand  God's 
speech.  The  announcement  and  the  evidence  of  immortality  is  in  the  Si- 
naic revelation.  No  more  announcement  was  necessary,  and  no  better  evi- 
dence could  be  given.  Therefore,  certainly  Moses  and  Israel  knew  and  be- 
lieved this  doctrine,  as  all  must  forever  do  who  believe  in  revelation.  This 
is  in  brief  what  I  have  to  say  on  the  subject  of  "  Immortality  and  Sinai." 
The  argument  based  thereon  will  be  the  subject  of  my  next  lecture.  The 
revelation  is,  in  the  first  place,  the  most  convincing  proof  of  the  dominion 
of  the  spirit  and  its  sovereignty  over  matter  and  its  modifications.  It  is 
in  the  second  place  the  evidence  for  the  similarity  in  kind  of  the  divine  and 
the  human  spirit.  It  is  in  the  third  place  the  demonstration  of  the  per- 
petual.relation  of  the  individual  to  the  universal  spirit,  as  the  body  stands 
in  relation  to  matter.  Therefore,  it  is  per  se  the  most  expressive  lesson  of 
personal  immortality  and  its  best  evidence. 


XII. 

A  RESUME  OF  THE  BODY  OF  DOCTRINE. 

The  Body  of  Doctrine  is  a  technical  expression  to  denote  an  aggregate 
of  doctrines  or  fundamental  theories  logically  connected,  which  form  the 
basis  of  any  system  of  religion  or  ethics.  I  have  attempted  in  the  previous 
lectures  of  this  series  to  analyze  the  doctrines  contained  in  the  Sinaic  reve- 
lation. This  Body  of  Doctrine  is  fundamental  to  the  three  religions  of  Ju- 
daism, Christianity  and  the  Islam.  However  widely  doctors  may  disagree 
in  definitions  and  subordinate  points,  they  must  agree  in  the  main,  viz  : 
that  this  is  the  substance  of  what  is  called  positive  or  revealed  religion; 
hence  we  have  set  forth  the  "Agreements,"  and  merely  pointed  out  some 
"  Disagreements  "  in  regard  to  definitions  and  subordinate  points. 

We  agree  that  this  is  not  a  world  of  dead  matter,  with  mechanical  forces, 
irrational,  insensible,  cold  and  dead,  thoughtlessly  and  aimlessly  engaged 
in  perpetual  production  and  destruction.  Neither  Monism  nor  Atomism, 
neither  Evolution,  in  as  far  as  it  is  a  mere  conglomeration  of  mechanical 
principles  and  hypotheses  without  foundation  in  fact,  nor  Positivism,  with 
its  agnostic  basis  and  its  method  of  selecting  facts  of  experience  or  experi- 
ment as  the  only  knowable  truth,  can  satisfy  us  who  believe  in  the  exist- 
tence  of  consciousness  and  reason,  freedom  and  love,  the  intelligence  of  the 
human  family,  and  the  spirit  which  must  be  the  substance  of  which  all  these 
functions  are  accidents  or  qualities.  Like  the  Preacher  of  old  we  feel  ne- 
cessitated to  exclaim  over  all  those  systems  which,  like  the  wind,  come  and 
go,  "  Vanity  of  vanities,  all  is  vanity  and  windy  thought."  We  can  not 
adopt  them  as  fabrics  of  thought,  because  they  negate  consciousness,  free- 
dom and  reason ;  nor  can  we  believe  in  them  as  a  matter  of  faith,  since 
they  are  hostile  to  the  moral  and  emotional  nature  of  man.  Therefore, 
whether  Jew  or  Gentile,  believer  or  skeptic,  we  must  seek  refuge  in  the  un- 
derlying fact  of  the  world's  theology,  to  protect  ourselves  and  others  against 
pessimism,  misanthropism,  despair  and  suicide,  which  are  the  natural  and 
actual  offspring  of  sophistry,  fallacy  and  falsity.  Daily  experience  con- 
firms this  dolorous  fact.  "  The  wicked  flee  when  none  pursueth  and  the 
righteous  rest  secure  like  the  Lion."  (Proverbs  xxviii.)  The  world's  civili- 
zation and  the  happiness  of  the  individual  enjoyed  therein  were  not 
erected  upon  the  systems  of  the  godless;  they  have  never  achieved  any  great 


—  78  — 

triumphs  in  the  cause  of  humanity.  Society  and  its  institutions  rest  upon 
the  fundamental  idea  of  the  spirit,  the  One  and  Eternal  God.  At  this  ad- 
vanced age  of  the  human  family  we  can  not  begin  history  anew,  nor  dare 
we  risk  happiness  and  progress  upon  individual  speculations.  We  can  not 
say  to  all  history,  thou  art  wrong,  nor  is  it  either  just  or  sensible  to  ad- 
vise our  neighbor,  who  dwells  in  security  in  his  own  house,  to  leave  it  and 
roam  over  boundless  wastes  without  approved  guide  or  compass.  Therefore 
we  must  come  to  the  same  conclusion  as  did  the  Preacher  of  old,  "At  the 
end  of  the  thing  all  is  to  be  heard  :  Fear  God  and  keep  His  commandments, 
for  this  is  the  whole  man."  the  whole  guide  and  compass  of  man. 

This  belief  in  the  One  and  Eternal  God  led  us  into  the  truism  of  the  per- 
petual connection  of  individual  and  universal  spirit,  the  connection  of  man 
with  God  ;  as  in  physical  nature  also  the  individual  being  stands  in  perpetual 
connection  and  reciprocity  with  the  cosmos.  Therefore  revelation  as  a  psy- 
chological fact  is  as  natural  as  the  process  of  digestion  and  assimilation  as  a 
physical  fact.  The  one  is  even  as  necessary  as  the  other  to  him  who  believes 
in  the  unity  or  oneness  of  God,  as  demonstrated  by  the  unison  of  nature. 
The  most  momentous  of  all  supposed  direct  manifestations  of  the  uni- 
versal to  the  individual  spirit  appeared  to  us  in  the  Sinaic  revelation,  be- 
cause it  contains  in  substance  all  the  doctrine  and  law  necessary  for  man 
and  mankind  to  secure  to  themselves  salvation,  peace  and  happiness  here 
and  hereafter,  the  life  of  righteousness  in  time  and  its  just  reward  in  eter- 
nity. Although  as  reasoners  we  must  reject  the  evidence  of  miracles,  we 
can  not  risk  the  happiness  of  man  to  a  frail  craft  made  of  supernatural  or 
even  unnatural  allegations,  and  our  Maker  has  granted  us  freedom  of 
thought;  yet  we  can  not  deny  the  Sinaic  revelation,  on  account  of  the  his- 
torical evidence  in  its  support ;  the  evidence  of  an  entire  nation  and  its  un- 
interrupted traditions,  the  evidence  of  all  Israel  from  the  very  day  when  he 
stood  before  Jehovah  at  Horeb  to  this  last  quarter  of  the  nineteenth  cen- 
tury;  the  evidence  of  all  Christian  and  Mohammedan  believers  of  all  cen- 
turies, generations,  climes  and  zone?,  whose  very  fabrics  of  religion,  law 
and  government,  aye,  the  fabric  of  civilized  society,  are  based  on  this  very 
belief  in  the  Sinaic  revelation  as  a  direct  manifestation  of  Diety  to  man.  In 
the  face  of  this  historical  evidence  it  matters  not  whether  we  are  able  to  un- 
derstand the  fact  or  whether  it  is  beyond  the  horizon  of  our  cogitation,  we 
are  bound  to  beiieve  that  which  is  historically  authenticated  and  we  have 
no  means  to  contradict. 

Next  we  analyzed  the  substance  of  the  Sinaic  revelation  and  found  in  it 
the  elements  of  human  knowledge  to  direct  and  guide  him  safely,  the  in- 
dividual and  the  community,  to  human  perfection  and  happiness.  The 
jurist  acknowledges  in  this  revealed  substance  the  foundation  of  right,  the 
divine  authority  of  justice,  and  the  categories  of  law,  to  which  nothing  can 


—  79  — 

be  added  and  from  which  nothing  can  be  taken  away.  So  we  find  in  it  the 
highest  and  surest  standard  of  rectitude  to  lead  the  nations  to  justice,  peace, 
freedom,  equality,  prosperity  and  happiness  ;  to  guide  the  individual  to 
righteousness  and  holiness,  satisfaction  and  happiness,  the  formation  of 
firm  and  solid  character  in  consonance  with  the  will  of  God  and  the  happi- 
ness of  man,  and  the  preparation  for  eternal  life  and  felicity.  We  find  in 
the  Sinaic  revelation  the  highest  species  of  evidence  affirming  and  estab- 
lishing in  the  mind  of  man  the  existence  and  love  of  the  Eternal  God,  the 
godlike  nature  and  immortality  of  man,  the  reality  of  the  moral  law,  the 
dominion  of  God's  universal  and  special  providence,  the  freedom  of  man 
and  his  accountability  to  God  and  the  Law,  the  mercy  of  our  Heavenly 
Father  for  the  repentant  sinner,  the  perfectability  of  human  nature  and  the 
solidarity  of  the  human  family  with  one  God,  one  justice,  one  freedom  and 
one  love  for  all.  This  is  the  Body  of  Doctrine  with  its  sufficient  reason  con- 
tained in  the  Sinaic  revelation.  These  are  the  elements  of  human  knowl- 
edge, together  with  the  adequate  motives  to  elevate  man  and  mankind  to 
that  high  position  of  satisfaction  and  happiness  which  is  the  idea1  of  all 
philanthropists. 

So  far  we  have  remained  within  the  bounds  of  our  "  Agreements."  No  fair 
reasoner  will  deny  an  iota  thereof.  Those  who  feel  the  woes  of  humanity  and 
sympathize  with  the  afflicted  and  oppressed  must  accept  this  Body  of  Doc- 
trine as  the  elements  of  salvation.  Those  who  speak  of  the  religion  of  the 
future  man  can  not  help  confessing  that  whatever  is  established  in  the  na- 
ture and  reason  of  man  will  remain  with  the  race  forever ;  therefore,  in  as  far 
as  this  Body  of  Doctrine  is  established  in  the  nature  and  reason  of  man, 
it  will  be  the  religion  of  all  generations,  as  we  have  no  cause  to  doubt  the 
final  and  universal  triumph  of  truth  over  all  superstition  and  sophistry, 
and  no  cause  to  think  that  there  could  exist  a  religion  without  God 
and  revelation,  and  the  doctrines  which  are  the  logical  sequents  thereof. 
In  as  far  then  as  Judaism  is  the  religion  revealed  on  Sinai,  it  is  the  uni- 
versal religion,  and  must  become  the  religion  of  the  future  man.  Truth 
once  enunciated  remains  truth  forever.  It  is  not  changed  or  improved  by 
any  progress  in  science  or  art,  any  number  of  inventions  or  discoveries. 
The  truth  established  on  Mount  Sinai  remains  truth  forever. 

But  there  are  also  "  Disagreements,"  and  there  the  tribal  religion,  the 
sectional  religion,  the  exclusive  religion,  the  intolerance  and  fanaticism  be- 
gin. Some  people,  both  Jews  and  Gentiles,  believe  too  much,  and  are 
eager  and  zealous  that  others  also  should  believe  like  them ;  there  the  strife 
begins.  We  all  believe  in  one  God.  We  are  monotheists.  All  worship 
God  as  the  loving  father  of  man.  The  more  intense  and  correct  this  belief 
the  more  tolerant  and  charitable  man  ought  to  be  toward  his  fellow-man, 
also  the  erring  and  wicked,  who,  after  all,  is  the  child  of  the  same  Father 


—  80  — 

of  all.  The  "  Agreements  "  produce  harmony.  But  there  comes  to  it  the 
element  of  "  Disagreement,"  and  produces  intolerance  and  fanaticism. 
Wherever  the  Jew  maintained  that  God  was  only  the  God  of  Israel  and  the 
patron  of  Palestine,  or  imagined  Him  in  the  anthropomorphous  form,  a 
mighty  king  sitting  upon  a  lofty  throne  in  His  heavenly  palace,  surrounded 
by  a  host  of  ministering  angels,  engaged  exclusively  with  the  affairs  of  His 
chosen  people,  he  became  a  fantastic  fanatic,  and  his  religion  tribal,  narrow 
and  intolerant.  He  must  go  to  Palestine  to  find  his  God,  and  must 
have  his  own  country  and  government,  for  this  world  is  not  God's  world 
with  him.  Confused  and  defective  reasoners  still  fancy  a  Jewish  nation- 
ality and  government,  the  restoration  of  the  throne  of  David  under  a  Messiah 
king,  of  which  there  is  no  idea  in  the  Sinaic  revelation  or  the  laws  of  Mo- 
ses. They  despair  of  human  reason  and  the  progress  of  humanity,  the 
solidarity  of  mankind  and  the  advancement  toward  that  objective  point  of 
all  prophecy,  because  their  conceptions  of  God  and  His  government  are  in 
adequate  obscured  and  confused ;  because  they  disagree  with  Israel,  whose 
God  is  the  Creator.  Preserver  and  Governor  of  the  universe  and  the  merci- 
ful Father  of  mankind.  They  disagree  with  Israel,  and  there  begins  their 
"Disagreement''  with  the  world  and  its  affairs. 

When  the  Mohammedan  limits  the  infinite  Deity  to  his  own  mosques  and 
confines  God's  eternal  love  and  mercy  to  his  few  co-religionists  whose  faces 
are  turned  in  prayer  toward  Mecca;  when  he  condemns  to  eternal  misery 
all  infidels,*,  e.,  all  non-Mohammedan  human  beings,  and  imposes  upon  the 
God  of  freedom  the  Oriental  Heathen  fatalism,  he  establishes  his  "  Dis- 
agreement" with  the  rest  of  mankind,  misconceives  the  Eternal  God,  ex 
eludes  himself  from  the  family  of  man,  disregards  the  affairs  of  this  world 
makes  himself  a  subservient  slave,  and  becomes  a  fanatic  whose  sole  objec- 
of  existence  is  to  enter  the  Mohammedan  paradise,  although  his  practice 
widely  differs  from  his  theories,  as  is  often  the  case,  also  among  other 
people.  His  fundamental  error  is  in  his  misconception  of  the  Eternal 
Deity. 

And  now  comes  the  orthodox  Christian  sectarian  and  tells  you  that  all 
your  doctrines  may  be  true  and  good,  but  they  are  worthless  unless  you  be- 
lieve also  in  the  dogmas  of  Christology,  the  first  point  of  which  is  the  belief 
in  a  triune  God.  If  you  urge  the  right  of  reason  to  reject  whatever  is  hostile 
to  its  dicta,  contrary  to  first  principles ;  he  will  answer  you  with  the  credo, 
you  must  believe  it  just  because  you  can  not  comprehend,  not  understand, 
not  think  it,  because  it  is  a  contradiction  in.  its  very  terms,  it  is  a  mystery, 
a  matter  of  faith,  and  faith  signifies  to  believe  contrary  to  reason.  You 
must  renounce  and  sacrifice  reason  to  receive  the  reward  of  faith,  for  with- 
out this  special  reward  you  are  damned  and  lost.  It  is  this  very  precept 
which  always  made  and  makes  now  so  many  schismatics,  infidels  and 


-  SI  — 

atheists.  They  take  the  God  of  dogmatic  theology  as  the  God  in  fact  and 
reality,  and  find  it  easy  to  dethrone  and  deny  it. 

If  you  furthermore  urge,  that  if  an  inexplicable  mystery  it  be,  it  could 
be  made  true  and  sure  only  by  a  divine  revelation  ;  for  what  man  can  not 
understand  he  could  not  possibly  advance  as  a  fact,  unless  he  obtained  his 
knowledge  thereof  by  undv>ubted  sensual  impressions  or  by  eye-witnesses 
whose  veracity  and  capacity  he  could  not  doubt.  Neither  of  which  can  be 
the  case  in  the  human  knowledge  of  God's  nature  and  essentiality.  In 
revelation,  however,  throughout  the  old  Bible  and  its  Apocrypha  there  is  no 
idea  of  a  trinity ;  and  according  to  some  of  the  best  expounders  of  the  New 
Testament  it  is  not  there.  It  was  not  even  an  established  belief  of  the 
Church  prior  to  the  Council  of  Nice,  and  right  there  and  after  it  the  pro- 
tests of  prelates  were  loud  and  emphatic  against  it.  Hence  it  was  certainly 
not  a  revelation,  which  in  so  important  a  point  must  have  been  at  least  as 
clear  and  intelligible  as  was  the  first  revelation :  ''  I,  Jehovah,  am  thy 
God,"  which  it  was  to  contradict  or  supplement.  If  it  is  no  revelation,  how 
could  I  know  and  believe  it?  Especially,  if  I  know  that  trinitarianism  is 
taken  from  the  Pagan  shrine,  why  must  I  believe  in  it? 

To  all  this,  however,  your  trinitarian  friend  will  reply  somewhat  to  this 
effect :  I  accept  the  canonical  books  of  the  New  Testament  as  a  new  reve- 
lation, and  have  no  doubt  in  the  perfect  truth  of  its  statements.  There 
are,  however,  passages  in  that  New  Testament,  especially  in  the  Gospel,  ac- 
cording to  John,  and  also  in  the  Epistles  of  Paul,  Jesus  speaking  of  him- 
self or  being  spoken  of  by  John  or  Paul  in  a  manner  which  I  can  under- 
stand only  to  the  effect  that  he  was  an  incarnation  of  the  Deity  himself.  So 
do  I  find  in  the  same  book  passages  which  refer  to  the  Holy  Ghost  as  a  sep- 
arate being  or  another  manifestation  of  the  same  Godhead.  Unable  to  un- 
derstand those  passages  otherwise,  I  must  either  believe  in  three  Gods  or 
one  God  who  consists  of  three  persons.  Being  a  Monotheist,  as  according 
to  the  Synoptics  Jesus  certainly  was,  and  according  to  the  other  Epistles 
his  Apostles  also  were,  I  am  obliged  to  be  a  trinitarian  and  believe  in  one 
God  in  three  persons. 

This  argument,  you  see,  is  fair  enough,  but  it  rests  upon  the  point  that 
because  there  are  certain  passages  in  the  New  Testament  which  might  be 
explained  by  the  trinitarian  hypothesis,  therefore  the  Supreme  Being  must 
be  in  fact  a  triune  God.  Others,  and  Christians,  too,  explain  those  pas- 
sages differently,  hence  there  is  no  certainty  in  them.  Others,  again,  ad- 
vance that  a  hypothesis  contrary  to  first  principles,  is  illegitimate,  whatever 
it  might  explain.  So,  for  instance,  one  might  advance  the  hypothesis  that 
the  authors  of  the  New  Testament  writings  were  guided  by  Philo's  specula- 
tions and  Pagan  beliefs,  and  glorified  their  master  with  poetical  tropes 

11 


—  82  — 

taken  from  those  sources.  Hypothesis  against  hypothesis  is  good  argu- 
ment, especially  if  the  latter  is  not  contrary  to  first  principles,  and  the 
former  is.  But  the  argument  is  faulty  in  itself.  The  hypothesis  could 
only  establish  the  possibility  of  understanding  those  passages  in  that  man- 
ner; it  can  never  establish  the  fact  that  God  is,  or  is  not,  a  triune  being. 
Confess  at  once  that  there  are  certain  passages  in  the  New  Testament,  as 
there  are  quite  a  number  in  Revelations  of  John,  Daniel  and  elsewhere, 
which  you  do  not  understand,  and  perhaps  -nobody  else  ever  will  be  able 
to  understand  them,  the  historical  key  to  unravel  the  mysteries  having  been 
lost;  and  be  guided  by  first  principles  in  harmony  and  unison  with  human 
reason. 

So  you  might  go  on  arguing  for  days,  perhaps  for  weeks,  and  neither 
the  trinitarian  nor  the  Unitarian  would  be  exhausted,  and  at  the  end,  most 
likely,  each  would  believe  as  he  did  before;  because  they  agree  in  prin- 
ciple, viz  :  in  their  belief  in  one  God,  and  disagree  only  in  the  understanding 
of  certain  passages  in  this  or  that  holy  book,  which  perhaps  both  of  them 
misunderstand. 

The  rabbis  of  old  maintained  that  a  belief  in  dualism  or  trinitarianism, 
especially  if  inherited  of  the  fathers,  is  not  to  be  considered  Paganism,  and 
so  does  Joseph  Albo  treat  the  question  in  his  book  "  On  Principles";  be- 
cause the  Dualist  or  Trinitarian  does  not  deny  the  one  God ;  he  merely  as- 
sumes another  definition  of  the  term.  Definition  is  the  office  of  reason, 
and  reason  is  free  before  God  and  man.  The  eame  is  the  case  with  the 
Mohammedan  and  the  Jewish  Kabbalist  and  Anthropomorphist,  as  Moses 
Maimonides  often  expressed  it.  The  Living  God  of  Israel,  the  Almighty, 
Preserver  and  Governor  of  the  Universe,  is  the  principle  which  guides  and 
pervades  Jews,  Christians  and  Mohammedans.  The  "  Disagreements"  are 
in  the  definitions,  as  is  the  case  also  in  conscience.  Those  who  attach  to 
their  definitions  the  value  of  essentiality  and  the  importance  of  principle, 
become  intolerant  fanatics  who  have  so  often  disturbed  the  peace  of  the  hu- 
man family,  and  tear  it  apart  in  hostile  factions  and  exclusive  clans.  Ra- 
tional men,  fair  reasoners,  are  humble  and  tolerant,  and  understand  well 
that  we  possess  only  two  authorities  to  decide  those  questions,  the  one  of 
which  is  reason,  which  can  not  go  beyond  first  principles,  and  will  never  at- 
tach undue  importance  to  its  own  definitions ;  and  the  second  is  the  Sinaic 
revelation,  which  teaches  us  that  God  is,  and  what  He  desires  man  to  do 
and  what  to  be.  It  is  not  in  man's  power  to  know  what  God  is,  hence  we 
know  only  the  announcement :  "  I,  Jehovah,  am  thy  God  " ;  if  he  was  a 
triune  God,  we  could  not  possibly  know  it ;  it  is  not  in  reason,  it  is  not  in 
revelation ;  it  is  not  necessary  to  know  it.  If  it  were,  I  think  and  believe 


—  83  — 

God  would  have  told  us  somewhere  and  somehow,  I,  Jehovah,  am  a  triune 
God. 

You  see,  all  we  can  do  and  ought  to  do  is,  that  we  agree  to  disagree  in 
such  issues,  while  we  agree  in  principle.  This  great  republic  was  built  up, 
and  is  governed  on  this  very  principle,  and  the  experiment  has  proved  a 
success.  Let  us  learn  and  apply  the  lesson  of  experience.  Let  us  humbly 
and  patiently  wait  till  mankind  shall  be  advanced  far  enough  to  decide  its 
"  Disagreements."  The  time  will  come  as  sure  as  the  day  succeeds  the 
night.  Until  it  comes  let  us  live  together  in  peace  and  good  will. 


XIII. 

PARADISE,  HELL,  SATAN,  EVIL  SPIRITS  OR  RECOMPENSE. 

Eschatology,  as  the  theologians  call  the  doctrine  of  the  last  and  final 
things,  the  judgment  after  death,  the  resurrection  of  the 'dead  and  the  hist 
judgment  day,  including  the  various  modes  of  punishment  or  reward  in 
another  region  of  the  universe  or  on  this  earth  radically  changed  for  the 
resurrected  man ;  eschatology  engaged  the  minds  of  the  theologians  and 
philosophers  of  all  ages,  among  Pagans  as  well  as  among  Israelites,  Chris-* 
tians  and  Mohammedans.  This,  according  to  its  nature,  being  a  matter  of 
faith  and  speculation  exclusively,  without  any  basis  of  cogitable  facts, 
imagination  found  in  it  a  wide  scope  to  build  up  conditions  and  states  of 
happiness  or  misery,  of  entity  or  nonentity,  which  were  grasped  by  faith 
and  rendered  acceptable  by  speculation. 

Imagination  is  lawless  reason.  It  is  a  free  function  of  the  mind.  None 
can  foretell  its  productions,  as  it  is  subject  to  no  law.  The  countless  va- 
rieties of  dreams,  of  melodies  in  music,  of  stories,  sceneries  and  figures  of 
speech  in  poetry,  and  the  variegated  productions  of  fancy  in  all  other  fields 
bear  testimony  to  its  perfectly  lawless  freedom.  Therefore,  in  eschatology, 
which  offered  so  boundless  a  field  to  fancy,  the  views  and  doctrines,  the 
hopes  and  fears,  the  promises  and  menaces  are  of  infinite  variety  among 
theologians  and  philosophers. 

•  One  point,  however,  is  strange  in  this  connection,  and  it  is  this  :  If  you 
run  over  the  Talmud  and  Midrash  of  the  Hebrews,  you  will  be  astonished 
to  find  in  them  precisely  the  same  views,  doctrines,  phantasma  and  phan- 
toms as  in  the  New  Testament  and  its  Apocrypha,  in  the  Fathers  of  the 
Church  and  the  Koran  and  its  expounders.  Consequently  the  speculations 
of  the  reflective  minds  on  those  topics  are  about  the  same  among  the  dif- 
ferent writers  who  adhered  to  any  of  the  three  creeds.  Also  the  recent 
speculations  of  Protestant  theologians  about  the  nails,  hair  and  intestines 
of  the  resurrected  men  have  their  counterpart  in  the  Talmud,  in  the  ques- 
tion earnestly  discussed  there,  whether  the  righteous  will  rise  with  or  with- 
out their  garments,  with  or  without  the  bodily  blemishes,  diseases  and  de- 
formities of  their  mundane  life.  All  the  materialistic  conceptions  of  the 
future  state  and  judgment  up  to  the  purely  idealistic  Visio  Dei  essentialis, 
"  to  enjoy  the  luster  of  the  Shekinah,"  as  the  Jews  expressed  it,  as  you  find 


—  85  — 

them  in  Christian  theology,  the  Heavenly  Jerusalem  included,  you  meet 
them  in  the  Talmud.  The  Jews,  therefore,  found,  as  regards  this  matter,  as 
much  satisfaction  in  their  Talmud  as  did  the  Christians  in  their  New  Testa 
ment  and  dogmatic  theology  and  the  Mohammedans  in  their  Koran,  with 
the  exception  of  the  female  attendants  on  the  saints  in  Paradise. 

It  would  be  very  interesting  to  compile  the  eschatological  statements  of  the 
Talmud,  and  place  them  in  juxtaposition  to  those  of  the  New  Testament, 
the  Koran  and  their  various  expounders.  It  would  prove,  I  think,  that  all 
of  them,  including  the  resurrection  and  ascension  of  the  Christian  Savior 
and  his  descent  to  Hades,  were  borrowed  from  the  Jews ;  productions  of 
fancy  by  different  men  in  different  climes  and  ages  can  not  be  as  identical 
as  those  allegations  are ;  and  the  rabbis  of  old,  distant  as  they  were  from 
Rome  as  far  as  Persia  up  to  India,  could  hardly  be  supposed  to  have  bor- 
rowed of  Christian  theologians,  although  they  did,  adopt  Pagan  myths  and 
Judaized  them.  The  miracles  also,  the  apparitions  and  ghost  stories  are 
of  the  same  kind  and  intent  in  all  those  sources,  and  the  reasoning  of 
later  theologians  runs  over  precisely  the  same  ground  among  Jews,  Chris- 
tians and  Mohammedans.  But  our  time  and  space  would  not  permit  us  to 
undertake  that  interesting  work.  We  can  only  say  here  that  the  Jews  be- 
lieved, like  Christians  and  Mohammedans,  in  future  existence,  reward  and 
punishment  on  exactly  the  same  ground  of  alleged  facts,  long  before  the 
philosophers  took  up  the  dogma,  reasoned  on  the  subject,  and  rendered  it 
acceptable  to  the  reasoning  mind,  long  before  Pythagoras  and  Socrates, 
long  before  Zoroaster  and  Confucius,  too,  because  the  consciousness  of  im- 
mortality, like  the  knowledge  of  the  existence  of  God,  is  man's  heritage 
from  Heaven.  All  the  legends  and  myths  which  were  invented  to  represent 
this  belief  in  an  acceptable  garb  amount  to  no  more  than  a  proof  that  the 
consciousness  of  immortality  was  in  man  long  before  he  philosophized.  It 
is  not  the  product  of  discursive  reasoning;  it  is  man's  own  birthright;  it 
is  part  and  parcel  of  his  nature. 

Some  of  these  legends  and  myths  refer  to  his  Satanic  majesty,  the  prince 
of  darkness,  Lucifer,  Mephistopheles,  the  vulgar  Devil,  with  his  host  of 
little  devils,  evil  demons,  unclean  spirits,  whose  chief  abode  is  in  some  un- 
known place,  called  Gehenna,  Gehinnom,  Hades,  purgatory,  hell,  Abaddon, 
and  five  other  names,  according  to  the  Talmud.  That  bad  place,  of  course, 
is  dark,  dismal  and  cold,  although  a  perpetual  fire  of  brimstone  burns 
there,  in  which  the  wicked  souls  are  burnt,  purified  .or  forever  tormented. 
It  must  be  a  cold  and  dark  fire,  and  yet  it  burns  .and  torments  the  poor 
souls  in  that  cold  and  dark  place.  Imagination  in  various  ages  and  locali- 
ties depicted  those  Dramatis  Personse,  and  peopled  that  dreadful  palace  with 
phantoms  in  correspondence  to  the  tastes,  grossness  of  criTnes,  the  igno- 


—  86  — 

ranee  and  stupidity  of  the  vulgar  masses,  to  which  priests  and  schoolmen 
added  their  shares,  as  the  nurse  shaped  her  tales  and  the  school-master 
bound  his  rod  according  to  the  rudeness  and  wickedness  of  the  parents 
whose  children  were  intrusted  to  their  care. 

It  is  unnecessary,  perhaps,  to  say  now,  at  this  high  noon  of  enlightenment, 
that  those  stories,  legends  and  myths  are  products  of  fancy  without  any  foun- 
dation in  fact;  and  deserve  no  more  credence  than  the  stories  of  the  same 
kind  in  ancient  mythology  or'  in  the  demonology  of  China.  Everybody 
almost  knows  now  that  which  a  rabbi  in  the  third  Christian  century  said, 
"  All  the  prophets  prophesied  concerning  the  days  of  the  Messiah,"  which 
signifies  the  future  of  the  human  family  on  earth ;  "  but  concerning  the 
coming  world  (the  state  of  existence  hereafter)  'No  eye  hath  seen  it  besides 
thee  (God)  ;  He  hath  made  it  to  hope  (or  wait)  for  him.'  ':  No  human  in- 
telligence can  understand  a  state  of  existence  purely  spiritual,  hence  none 
could  approximately  define  the  nature  of  spiritual  reward  or  punishment, 
or  of  a  place  where  the  souls  of  the  departed  abide.  It  is  all  speculation 
based  on  speculation,  and  imagination  taking  its  material  from  this  mun- 
dane life,  with  its  fears  and  sufferings.  It  is  evident,  therefore,  that  all 
which  has  been  written  on  Satan,  evil  spirits,  Gehenna  or  Paradise,  pur- 
gatory or  hell,  fire  and  brimstone,  is  poetry,  plain  and  simple,  without  any 
solid  fact  to  rely  upon  or  any  principle  of  reason  to  defend  it.  These  things 
belong  to  the  museum  of  antiquities,  to  the  arsenal  of  history  as  charac- 
teristics, of  the  ages  and  places,  where  those  respective  legends  and  myths 
were  invented.  All  we  have  a  right  in  this  connection  to  ask  is,  that  the 
Jew  and  the  unbeliever  do  not  laugh  over  the  Satan  and  ghost  stories  and  the 
practice  of  exorcism  reported  in  the  Gospels  and  Acts,  although  if  those 
stories  were  not  in  those  books  they  would  prove  more  acceptable  10  in- 
telligent readers  now;  nor  should  they  deride  the  quibbling  of  scho- 
liasts in  the  theo- philosophical  treatises  on  the  Christian  dogmas,  and  the 
thunderbolts  of  excommunication  which  they  hurled  at  one  another  when 
they  happened  to  disagree  on  the  details  of  this  matter,  although  it  is  exceed- 
ingly ridiculous  to  read  it  in  any  history  of  dogmatics ;  because  the  Chris- 
tian would  say  to  the  Jew,  You  have  precisely  the  same  stories  in  your  Tal- 
mud, and  the  same  quibbling  on  these  points  in  your  post-Talmudical  scho- 
liasts and  Kabbalists,  who  describe  heaven  and  hell,  Gan  Eden  and  Gehin- 
nom,  with  all  that  is  done,  enjoyed  and  suffered  there,  with  the  accuracy  and 
precision  with  which  the  schoolboy's  text-book  describes  the  surface  of  the 
earth.  And  to  the  unbeliever  the  Christian  might  well  say,  You  do  not 
believe  in  one  devil,  but  you  believe  in  many.  You  who  make  hocus-pocus 
with  the  spirits  and  believe  in  rapping  and  tapping,  in  vulgar  soothsaying 
and  witchcraft,  in  dark  arts  performed  in  the  dark,  you  must  riot  laugh  over 


—  87  — 

the  ghost  stories  of  other  people.  Again  the  Jew  has  the  right  to  say  to 
the  Christian,  You  have  no  right  to  laugh  over  the  absurdities  and  ghost 
stories  of  the  Talmud  and  its  expounders  of  the  past,  when  you  believe  in  a 
personal  Satan  who  tempted  and  tried  the  Son  of  God,  absurdity  can 
hardly  go  beyond  this ;  when  you  believe  the  ghost  stories  and  exorcisms  of 
the  New  Testament,  which  are  certainly  glaring  enough  to  defy  reason  and 
override  all  intelligence.  The  greatest  miracles  of  the  Talmud  are  mere 
child's  play  in  comparison  to  the  immaculate  conception,  the  resurrection 
of  the  crucified  one  from  death  and  his  post-mortem  feats  on  earth,  in 
Hades  and  then  in  Heaven.  So  Jew,  Christian  and  Mohammedan  might 
well  say  to  one  another,  Laugh  not  at  me,  look  at  your  own. 

We,  however,  who  have  no  reason  to  believe  absurdities,  because  they  are 
written  in  the  Talmud  or  any  other  book ;  who  adhere  to  the  first  prin- 
ciples of  reason  and  the  Sinaic  revelation,  and  rely  in  nowise  or  manner 
upon  the  evidence  of  miracles ;  who  reject  whatever  is  unnatural  in  thought, 
fancy  or  deed,  and  adhere  steadfastly  to  the  dicta  of  reason  and  the  Sinaic 
standard  of  rectitude,  its  command  of  righteousness  and  holiness,  and  its 
demonstration  of  providence,  freedom  and  immortality,  I  mean  those  who 
are  true  and  upright  in  these  matters,  we  do  not  laugh,  we  do  not  ridicule, 
we  do  not  scorn,  we  understand  and  appreciate  that  wonderful  things  have 
been  written  for  bearded  children,  for  ignorant  multitudes,  for  masses  un- 
able to  reason  for  themselves,  and  have  been  written  with  the  best  inten- 
tions to  improve  and  elevate  the  human  mind,  to  impress  neglected  human- 
ity with  the  sublime  truths  of  God,  providence,  justice,  holiness  and  immor- 
tality, in  ages  and  localities  unfit  and  unable  to  think  in  the  abstract  form, 
although  they  were  certainly  not  written  for  men  of  advanced  intelligence. 
We  can  not  laugh  at  those  things,  we  can  only  see  in  them  the  moral  and  in- 
tellectual altitude  of  certain  people  for  whom  those  things  were  written,  and 
attempt  to  ascertain  the  intentions  of  those  writers,  who  are  certainly 
teachers  of  righteousness  and  intended  the  education  of  mankind.  We  have 
a  right  to  say,  why  do  you  make  so  much  noise  over  your  salvation  if  there 
is  no  devil  and  no  hell  to  be  saved  from?  Why  do  you  speak  and  write  so 
much  of  that  unknown  world  if  you  know  no  more  and  no  better  than  we 
do?  What  means  that  terror  of  damnation  if  you  can  not  form  the  re- 
motest idea  of  either  damnation  or  salvation?  But  if  you  imagine  or  be- 
lieve that  you  know  all  that  which  reason  and  the  Sinaic  revelation  do  not 
teach,  you  are  welcome  to  it,  if  it  gives  you  satisfaction  and  pleasure ;  but 
grant  us  the  privilege  at  least  to  imagine  and  believe  that  we  know  those 
things  better,  or  at  least  equally  as  well  as  you  do.  We  do  not  laugh  at 
you  and  you  shall  not  sneer  at  as.  We  do  not  call  you  superstitious,  and 
you  shall  not  call  us  stiff-necked  and  hard-hearted.  We  do  not  avoid 


—  88  — 

you,  and  you  shall  not  pursue  us.  We  do  not  advise  God  to  exclude  any 
human  being  from  His  love  and  grace,  and  you  shall  not  arm  your  God  with 
thunderbolts  to  cru.-h  and  condemn  us.  "  I  am  (for)  peace,  and  when  they 
speak  (it  is)  for  war."  This  verse  might  also  be  rendered  thus,  "  I  am 
for  peace;  although  they  may  be  all  for  war,  whenever  they  speak." 

There  can  be  no  doubt  that  neither  in  reason  nor  the  Sinaic  revela- 
tion there  could  be  an  idea  of  a  hell,  a  devil,  evil  spirits  or  unclean 
spirits.  There  is  no  mention  in  that  revelation  of  any  future  reward  or 
punishment  in  any  form,  simply  because  whatever  man  can  not  understand 
can  not  be  revealed  to  him  in  words ;  and  man  can  not  and  does  not  under- 
stand a  state  of  purely  spiritual  existence.  Therefore  wherever  men  have 
spoken  of  that  existence  they  were  obliged  to  express  their  thoughts  and 
sentiments  in  concrete  and  anthropomorphous  terms,  which  may  have  been 
correctly  understood  at  the  time,  but  must  necessarily  sound  absurd  to 
posterity,  who  know  not  the  spiritual  idea  connected  then  and  there  with 
the  concrete  and  anthropomorphous  expression;  and  the  Sinaic  revelation 
was  originally  intended  to  be  universally  and  correctly  understood.  Lan- 
guage has  no  word  now  for  immortality  and  must  resort  to  the  negative 
expression  of  not  mortal;  nor  has  it  a  term  to  express  the  purely  spiritual 
state  of  existence.  The  Jews  coined  the  expression  Hisharath  han-Nephesh, 
"  Preservation  of  the  soul"  for  immortality,  but  they  found  no  term  by 
which  to  denote  the  state  of  future  existence,  because  it  is  as  incompre- 
hensible as  the  quodity  of  God.  We  know  that  God  is,  and  know  in  part 
from  nature,  history  and  revelation  what  He  does  and  what  he  desires  man 
to  do ;  but  we  know  not  what  and  how  He  is.  So  we  can  only  know  that  the 
soul  is  an  immortal  spirit  as  revelation  teaches  and  reason  affirms ;  but  we 
can  not  know  what  and  how  the  soul  is  in  the  body  or  outside  thereof,  in 
time  or  in  eternity.  It  is  self-evident,  therefore,  that  we  can  not  under- 
stand the  nature  of  the  reward  or  punishment  to  be  administered  to  the 
disembodied  soul ;  hence  all  presentations  of  a  hell,  hell-fire,  torments, 
brimstone,  large  devil  and  small  devils,  from  the  standpoint  of  reason  and 
the  Sinaic  revelation,  are  radically  false  and  purely  fictitious.  Wherever 
the  term  Satan  occurs  in  Scriptures,  it  must  be  taken  as  a  fiction,  a  per- 
sonification of  "  hindrance"  to  do  certain  things. 

The  idea  of  pome  kind  of  a  reward  and  punishment  after  death,  the  pre- 
cise nature  of  which  is  unknown,  is  frequently  expressed  figuratively  in  the 
Bible.  The  sacred  writers  speak  frequently  of  Sheol;  and  Sheol  does  not 
signify  HELL,  for  Jacob  said  of  himself,  "  I  will  go  down  mourning  to  my 
son  (Joseph)  to  Sheol"  (Genesis  xxxv.  37.)  The  term  singnifies  "  nether- 
world," an  abode  for  the  souls  of  the  departed,  very  deep  below  (Job  xi. 
8),  where  all  are  alike  (Ibid.  iii.  12  e.  s.),  all  must  go  there  (Isaiah  xiv.), 


—  89  — 

the  King  and  his  servants,  the  great  and  the  small,  old  or  young,  rich  or 
poor,  all  go  to  Sheol.  No  hell-fire,  no  particular  suffering,  no  diabolic  tor- 
ments are  mentioned  or  even  hinted  at  in  connection  with  the  soul's  abode 
in  Sheol.  It  rather  appears  that  all  become  there  Rephaim,  slumbering  and 
dreaming  shades,  conscious  of  their  own  deeds  and  unconscious  of  the  outer 
world,  living  purely  subjective  and  without  connection  with  any  existing 
object,  a  sort  of  dream  life,  in  which  a  person's  consciousness  of  his  wick- 
edness and  misdeeds  is  his  punishment,  as  on  the  other  hand  the  con- 
sciousness of  goodness  and  holiness  is  his  reward.  It  appears  to,  have 
been  the  idea  that  the  soul  deprived  of  its  bodily  organism  could  only  have 
subjective  existence  and  recognize  only  itself  and  its  own  doings  and  omis- 
sions without  the  ability  to  recognize  objects  of  any  kind,  which  is  done  by 
bodily  organs. 

Not  all  souls,  however,  remain  forever  in  that  condition.  The  pious  rise 
from  that  lower  to  the  higher  region,  or  to  a  state  of  higher  life,  or  even  to 
that  highest  state  which  is  called  Visio  Dei  essentialis,  "  to  enjoy  the  luster 
of  the  Shekinah."  This  hope  and  belief  is  frequently  expressed  by  David, 
Job  and  other  Bible  worthies.  "  Jehovah  bringeth  up  from  Sheol  my  soul, 
enliveneth  me  from  among  those  that  go  down  in  the  pit ;  sing  to  Jehovah, 
all  His  pious  ones,  and  give  thanks  to  the  memorial  of  His  holiness"  (Psalms 
xxx.),  saith  David,  and  the  sons  of  Karah  repeat  the  same  idea  thus  :  "  Elo- 
him  only  will  (or  can)  redeem  my  soul  from  Sheol,  when  he  will  take  me. 
Selah."  (Ibid.  xlix.  16.)  David  said,  "Thou  abandonest  not  my  soul  to 
Sheol,  thou  sufferest  not  thy  pious  ones  to  see  corruption;  thou  wilt  make 
known  unto  me  the  path  of  life,  the  fulness  of  joys  (which  are)  with  thy 
countenance,  the  pleasantness  (which  is)  at  thy  right  hand  forever"  (Psalm 
xvi.),  which  is  the  Biblical  foundation  for  the  Visio  Dei  essentialis ;  and  Job 
in  his  suffering  exclaims  that  he  would  cheerfully  bear  up  under  the  op- 
pressive burden  of  visitation  and  wait  hopefully  in  Sheol  until  the  time  of 
his  change  would  come ;  if  he  was  sure  that  God  would  find  him  worthy  of 
that  higher  state  of  life  after  death!  (Job  xiv.  13-14.)  For  another  sacred 
bard  had  said,  probably  before  Job,  "  Not  the  dead  will  praise  God,  and  not 
all  of  those  who  go  down  to  silence  (to  Sheol)  ;  but  we  (the  "  blessed  ones 
of  Jevovah  " — verse  15)  will  praise  the  Lord  from  now  and  forever.  Halle- 
lujah." (Psalms  cxv.  15-18.)  The  Prophet  Isaiah  expressed  the  hope, 
Ve'eretz  Rephaim  thappil,  u  The  land  of  the  shades  (Sheol)  thou  wilt  cause 
to  fall "  ;  to  which  he  added,  Billa  ham-Maveth  lan-Netzach,  "  Death  will  be 
swallowed  in  eternity,  and  Jehovah  will  wipe  the  tear  from  every  counte- 
nance." (Isaiah  xxv.  8.)  He  evidently  believed  that  there  is  also  in  Sheol 
a  progress  from  lower  to  higher  conditions  for  all  human  beings ;  or  that 

12 


—  90  — 
* 

the  progress  of  man  on  earth  to  higher  and  clearer  self-consciousness  by  the 
universal  triumphs  of  enlightenment  and  holiness  will  deprive  Sheol  of  its 
inhabitants,  in  consequence  of  the  solidarity  of  the  human  family.  This  is 
the  Biblical  foundation  of  eschatology  without  devil,  hell,  brimstone  or  any 
particular  instruments  of  torture  and  any  offense  to  human  reason. 

We  have  to  add  to  this  the  conservation,  constancy  and  universality  of 
force,  viz  :  that  the  same  forces  remain  and  are  equally  efficient  at  all  times 
and  in  all  parts  of  the  universe.  Call  the  sentient  and  intelligent  soul  a 
force,  and  you  do  at  once  understand  its  immortality.  The  Sinaic  revela- 
tion is  the  proof  for  the  immortal  and  God-like  nature  of  man ;  and  the 
principle  of  justice,  which  includes  the  ideas  of  reward  and  punishment. 
The  law  of  God-like  force  is  to  outlast  time  and  be  the  same  in  eternity ; 
hence  there  must  be  reward  and  punishment  also  hereafter.  In  as  far,  how- 
ever, as  moral  wrongs  are  subjective  only,  and  its  consequences  are  limited 
in  time,  so  must  the  punishment  be  subjective  and  limited  in  time.  In 
as  far  as  the  good  and  true  is  eternal,  so  must  be  its  reward.  The  righteous 
and  self-conscious  souls  arise  to  that  glory  which  we  can  not  understand  in 
this  state  of  existence ;  the  wicked  and  brutal  men  who  never  rose  to  a 
state  of  pure  self-consciousness  in  this  life,  punish  themselves  in  Sheol, 
until  God  in  his  mercy  shall  call  them  from  subjective  stupor  to  objective 
cogitation,  which  we  again  understand  not.  This  is.  Bible  eechatology 
without  any  interference  with  God  or  human  reason,  and  without  any  means 
of  salvation  besides  righteousness,  holiness  rationality  freedom  and  progress. 


GIFTS  OF  GRACE,  REDEMPTION  AND  SALVATION. 

PART  I. 

An  ancient  prophet  said  (Micah  vi.  6):  "  Wherewith  shall  I  approach 
Jehovah,  bow  myself  before  the  High  Elohimf  Shall  I  approach  Him  with 
burnt  offerings,  with  calves  of  a  year  old?  Can  Jehovah  be  pleased  with 
thousands  of  rams,  or  with  ten  thousand  rivers  of  oil?  Shall  I  give  my 
first-born  for  my  transgression,  the  fruit  of  my  body  for  the  sin  of  my  soul? 
He  hath  told  thee,'0  !  man,  what  is  good,  and  what  Jehovah,  thy  Elohim,  re- 
quireth  of  thee;  it  is  but  to  do  justice,  to  love  goodness,  and  to  walk  un- 
ostentatiously with  thy  Elohim."  This  simple  passage  contains  the  old, 
old  questions  of  the  religious  mind,  viz,  wherewith  shall  the  mortal  being 
appear  before  the  Majesty  on  High,  the  Lord  of  the  universe,  or  which  are 
the  proper  means  of  worship?  Are  the  fat  rams  of  Bashan  or  the  streams 
of  oil  acceptable  to  Him?  And  the  next  question  is,  how  shall  the  poor 
sinner  atone  for  his  transgressions  before  Him  who  is  most  pure  and  most 
holy?  Shall  I  give  the  best  and  dearest  I  have  as  a  ransom  for  my  guilty 
soul ;  which  are  the  means  of  redemption,  redemption  from  the  yoke  of  sin 
and  guilt?  How  shall  I  purify  and  elevate  my  soul  to  save  it  from  the  pangs 
of  guilt  and  the  domain  of  death,  to  rest  in  peace  in  Sheol,  and  be  entitled  to 
the  hope  that  the  Almighty  will  call  me  from  the  dream-Jife  of  Sheol  to  the 
fulness  of  joy  which  is  in  His  presence,  the  pleasantness  and  bliss  which  are 
at  His  right  hand  forever?  Which  are  the  means  of  salvation?  They 
must  be  in  man  and  not  outside  of  him,  as  the  capacities  of  sin  and  self- 
destruction  are  also  in  him.  They  must  be  in  human  will  and  reason  as 
the  ability  to  soar  aloft  is  in  the  bird.  So,  it  appears,  that  prophet  thought 
who,  in  answering  those  momentous  questions,  points  out  means  within 
the  power  of  the  human  will  and  the  counsel  of  the  individual  reason;  be 
right,  be  good,  be  true  and  be  saved,  so,  0 !  man,  thou  hast  been  told,  the 
prophet  advises.  Be  redeemed  by  righteousness,  be  saved  by  the  love  of 
the  good  and  the  true ;  by  opening  widely  the  portals  of  reason  for  the 
King  of  Glory  to  come  in ;  by  expanding  the  soul  and  unfolding  its  capac- 
ities, to  rise  above  the  chains  of  matter,  the  prison  of  the  demi-conscious 
dream-life  and  the  self-delusion  of  passion's  powerless  slave ;  to  rise  to  the 
throne  of  glory.  This  is  resurrection  in  fact,  rising  in  this  life  from  Sheol 
to  the  throne  of  glory,  "  the  nearness  of  God  ";  and  for  all  we  know,  it  is 
also  in  life  hereafter  the  rising  of  the  soul  from  Sheol  to  the  "  nearness  of 


-  92  — 

God,"  by  the  inherent  abilities  to  rise  from  dim  consciousness  and  self- 
deceit  to  the  sunny  height  of  glory  and  joy,  in  a  state  of  clear  and  full  self- 
consciousness. 

This  appears  to  be  the  idea  of  that  prophet  and  of  all  prophets  who  re- 
ceived their  inspiration  from  Mount  Sinai.  But  it  appears  to  be  too  simple 
to  be  true  and  too  natural  to  be  satisfactory  in  the  estimation  of  dogmatic 
theologians.  u  For  God  hath  made  man  right,  and  they  seek  many  reckon- 
ings." Ever  since  man  has  reached  the  consciousness  of  his  superiority  to 
the  brute,  he  has  asked  the  same  identical  questions  in  the  most  different 
forms  :  Which  are  the  proper  means  of  worship,  of  atonement,  of  redemp- 
tion, of  salvation?  And  the  answers  are  almost  as  numerous  as  the  stars 
and,  in  the  majority  of  cases,  as  absurd  and  illogical  as  the  madman's 
dance.  It  is  hard  to  say  what  folly  and  cruelty  man  has  not  committed  un- 
der the  impression  that  he  would  thus  please  and  appease  the  gods  and  save 
his  soul  from  perdition.  From  the  human  victims  sacrificed  to  Pagan  gods 
to  the  autos-da-fe  of  civilized  barbarians ;  from  the  self-destruction  of  the 
infatuated  Hindoo  seeking  atonement  for  his  sins  to  the  Flagelants,  hermits, 
ascetics,  monks  and  nuns  for  the  greater  glory  of  God,  reaching  down  to 
our  very  doors ;  from  the  dancing,  fighting,  wounding  priests  of  Baal  on 
Mount  Carmel,  and  the  women  weeping  and  lamenting  over  the  descent  of 
Thammuz  or  Adonis  to  the  nether  world  down  to  the  shouting,  dancing, 
shaking  and  screaming  fraternities  of  our  days ;  from  the  unchaste  women 
in  the  Heathen  temples  and  the  crazed  ones  howling  and  leaping  for  the 
glory  of  Cerus  and  Bacchus  ;  from  the  wars  of  extermination,  with  all  their 
terrors,  waged  in  behalf  of  this  or  that  god,  this  or  that  dogma,  waged  by 
nation  against  nation,  sect  against  sect,  or  priest  against  priest,  down  to 
the  milder  though  no  less  inhuman  form  of  persecution  and  exclusion  for 
opinion's  sake;  from  animal  victims  slaughtered  upon  the  altar  on  Mount 
Moriah  to  victimized  reason  sacrificed  in  seminaries  and  churches ;  from 
the  Jew's  and  Musselman's  circumcision  to  the  Christian  sacrament  of 
baptism;  from  the  Jew's  and  Musselman's  fasts  to  cancel  their  sins  to  the 
Christian's  eating  and  drinking  the  transubstantiated  flesh  and  blood  of 
the  Savior  for  the  very  same  end,  with  all  the  mysteries  and  absurdities 
connected  with  the  rites ;  it  is  safe  to  maintain  that  there  is  hardly  an 
absurdity,  a  folly  or  cruelty  invented  by  imagination  which  at  one  time  or 
another  has  not  been  used  as  a  holy  rite,  and  conscientiously  practiced  in 
this  or  that  corner  of  the  earth  as  means  of  worshiping  God,  atoning  for 
sins,  obtaining  redemption  and  achieving  salvation. 

Most  remarkable,  perhaps,  in  this  matter  is,  that  people  with  these  facts 
before  their  eyes,  can  not  convince  themselves  that  means  and  forms  are 
subject  to  change,  hence  that  none  of  them  could  be  intended  to  be  ever- 


—  93  — 

lasting,  to  suit  all  men  under  all  climates  and  under  all  circumstances ; 
furthermore  that  all  means  and  forms,  observances  and  practices,  whatever 
end  they  may  have  in  view,  if  they  are  foolish  or  absurd,  i.  e.,  contrary  to 
reason,  barbarous  or  cruel,  i.  e.,  contrary  to  humanitarian  principles,  or  even 
unaesthetic  and  offensive  to  the  refined  taste  of  any  age  or  locality,  they  must 
also  be  contrary  to  the  Law  of  God.  for  the  end  does  not  justify  any  bad 
means.  And  yet,  in  those  very  means  and  forms,  observances  and  practices, 
there  is  the  main  cause  of  the  "  Disagreements  "  among  Jews,  Christians 
and  Mohammedans.  As  nearly  as  men  can  agree  on  abstract  questions,  all 
agree  on  the  main  principles  of  faith,  the  principal  doctrines  of  religion;  all 
stand  upon  the  platform  of  the  Sinaic  revelation,  and  all  intend  and  hope 
to  enter  the  everlasting  covenant  between  God  and  man.  The  u  Disagree- 
ments "  reduce  themselves  exclusively  to  means  and  forms. 

The  worst  in  this  matter  is,  that  those  very  "  Disagreements  "  were  and 
are  even  now,  to  a  certain  extent,  the  causes  of  bewildering  superstitions 
and  ridiculous  prejudices  of  man  against  his  neighbor,  which  clog  reason 
and  obscure  the  conscience ;  and  of  that  wild  and  reckless  fanaticism  which 
is  fraught  with  nameless  misery  and  woe.  Because  it  is  so,  one  should 
think  it  is  the  duty  of  every  philanthropist  to  wage  war  upon  all  those  means 
and  forms,  observances  and  practices,  which  cause  the  mischief,  the  separa- 
tion, disintegration  and  hostility.  But  unfortunately  man  can  not  do  with- 
out them ;  history  proves  that  he  can  not.  Man  can  not  be  and  will  never 
be  without  religion,  and  religion  consists  of  abstract  truths,  doctrines,  pre- 
cepts and  commandments,  which  are  essentially  spiritual  and  formally  ab- 
stract. These  abstract  truths  must  be  reduced  to  practice  by  tangible  means, 
concrete  forms,  inherited  observances,  which  become  holier  by  age  and  im- 
portant by  general  consent.  Besides  there  are  quite  a  number  of  people  who 
never  reason,  never  reflect,  never  think  beyond  a  certain  limit.  With  them 
the  concrete  form  has  assumed  the  importance  of  the  spirit.  You  break  the 
form,  and  all  their  religion  with  its  hope  and  consolation,  with  its  soothing, 
controlling  and  guiding  effects,  is  lost  to  them.  You  say  they  worship  the 
form  or  the  means,  they  are  idolaters,  let  their  idolatry  be  destroyed  for  the 
sake  of  truth.  Perhaps  they  are ;  but  they  are  nevertheless  men  and  breth- 
ren and  fellow-creatures  and  children  of  your  God  and  mine,  you  must  take 
care  of  them,  you  dare  not  deprive  them  of  that  religion  which  they  possess, 
which  satisfies,  controls  and  guides  them.  Therefore,  the  philanthropist 
must  be  slow  and  considerate  in  his  attempts  to  eradicate  those  causes  of 
evils  which  befall  man. 

On  the  other  hand  those  means  and  forms  are  of  grave  importance  to  the 
most  intelligent  as  well  as  to  the  most  illiterate.  However  intelligent, 
learned  and  enlightened  a  man  may  be,  he  must  nevertheless  tell  himself,  I 


—  94  — 

do  believe  in  God,  revelation,  providence,  freedom,  justice,  the  brotherhood 
and  immortality  of  man ;  I  do  not  wish  to  tear  these  convictions  out  of  my 
soul,  and  even  if  I  should,  I  could  not  do  it,  for  I  can  not  change  hu- 
man nature,  nor  can  I  control  the  power  of  reason  and  conscience  whose 
dicta  these  beliefs  are.  I  must  naturally  ask  myself:  How  shall  I  express 
the  veneration,  gratitude  and  love  which  I  feel  to  my  Maker;  how  shall  I 
worship  Him,  for  whom  my  soul  yearns  and  pants,  as  panteth  the  hart 
after  the  brooks  of  water?  and  how  shall  I  give  utterance  to  the  regret,  the 
sorrow,  the  repentance  and  the  remorse  I  feel  over  the  misdeeds  I  have  com- 
mitted ;  how  shall  I  heal  the  burning  wound  in  my  conscience?  and  how 
shall  I  withstand  all  the  temptations  of  lust  and  passion,  and  nourish  my 
soul  with  goodness  and  wisdom  to  escape  death  and  become  worthy  of 
God's  grace?  These  are  exactly  the  same  questions  which  the  Prophet  Micah 
asked  and  which  every  conscientious  man  must  ask  himself  sometimes. 
Levity  and  carelessness  in  those  things  may  do  for  awhile,  but  not  for- 
ever. Every  man  has  his  conscientious  scruples ;  in  every  man  the  voice  of 
his  better  nature  speaks  at  one  time  or  another.  The  literature  of  the  civil- 
ized world  suggests  that  man  rather  thinks  too  much  than  too  little  over 
those  questions.  Four-fifths  of  the  whole  Jewish  literature,  Bible,  Talmud 
and  Midrash  included,  treats  on  these  very  questions;  and  the  theological 
library  of  Christians  and  Mohammedans  is  immense. 

As  man  is  generally  expected  to  believe  too  much,  which  has  caused 
many  to  believe  little  or  nothing,  so  is  he  also  expected  to  do  too  much  for 
his  salvation.  The  simple  answer  of  the  Prophet  Micah  to  those  paramount 
queries.  u  Be  right,  be  good,  be  true,''  was  overlooked  and  submerged  under 
a  flood  of  speculations,  in  which  all  those  sandbanks  and  rocks  of  "  Disa- 
greements "  threaten  destruction  to  the  frail  bark  of  religion.  We  must 
look  to  our  chart  and  compass,  to  reason  and  conscience  on  the  one  hand, 
to  the  Sinaic  revelation  on  the  other,  in  order  to  ascertain  our  course,  to  de- 
cide whether  the  Prophet  Micah  or  the  vulgar  theology  furnishes  correct 
answers  to  man's  paramount  queries.  Reason  answers,  man  is  a  complete 
individual  in  his  physical  organism.  He  is  in  possession  of  all  those  or- 
gans and  qualities  which  are  necessary  to  sustain  himself  and  preserve  his 
race.  Spiritually  also  he  must  be  a  complete  "  little  world  "  with  all  the 
capacities  and  faculties  to  sustain  himself  and  preserve  his  identity  intact 
as  a  spiritual  individual  in  time  and  eternity.  As  he  possesses  organs  of 
digestion,  nutrition  and  assimilation,  which  perform  their  task  without  any 
aid  from  abroad,  so  he  possesses  by  the  grace  of  his  Maker  the  capacities 
and  faculties  to  become  free,  intelligent,  noble,  generous,  eminently  self- 
conscious,  immortal  and  happy.  As  he  possesses  the  capacities  to  reach 
human  perfection,  he  must  be  able  to  reach  happiness,  for  happiness  is  in 


—  95  — 

perfection  only.  In  as  far  then  as  he  has  reached  human  perfection,  he  has 
reached  happiness;  and  inasmuch  as  the  happiness  of  perfection  is  not  an 
organic  sensation,  it  is  a  spiritual  satisfaction,  which  must  be  co-eternal 
with  the  spirit  itself.  This  is  reason's  answer  to  those  paramount  queries, 
sealed  and  confirmed  by  man's  conscience  and  consciousness.  It  tells  us, 
man  is  his  own  guide  and  compass.  He  is  the  sole  author  of  his  own  weal 
or  woe.  He  is  his  own  Heaven  or  hell.  Healthy  food  and  exercise 
strengthen  the  body.  Healthy  moral  and  spiritual  food  strengthen  the 
soul.  The  body  grows,  so  does  the  soul.  The  body  develops  to  human 
perfection,  so  does  the  soul,  by  the  nutriment  which  either  of  them  re- 
ceives ;  with  the  only  distinction  that  the  growth  of  body  has  its  natural 
limits,  as  all  matter  has,  and.the  growth  of  spirit  is  subject  to  no  perceptible 
limits,  it  is  unlimited,  and  therefore  immortal,  eternal.  It  is  the  will  in 
man,  as  Elihu  said  in  the  Book  of  Job,  which  makes  of  the  one  a  sound, 
strong  and  skilled  laborer,  and  of  the  other  a  delicate  and  indolent  spec- 
tator. It  is  the  will  which  makes  of  the  one  an  energetic,  intelligent,  en- 
lightened, honest  and  upright  apostle  of  righteousness ;  and  of  the  other  a 
useless  camp-follower.  It  is  the  will  which  rouses  one  to  the  height  of  self- 
consciousness  and  immortality  and  eternal  happiness,  and  leaves  the  other 
in  a  perpetual  dream-life  here,  hence  also  in  Sheol.  The  will  and  you  your- 
selves are  identical.  Your  will  is  yourself.  It  is  nothing  outside  of  your 
own  being.  You  will  it  earnestly  and  energetically,  and  yours  must  be  im- 
mortality and  happiness;  you  will  it  not  and  remain  slumbering  in  the 
embrace  of  vegetable  and  animal  functions  here  and  in  Sheol  there.  The 
will  receives  incentive  and  impetus  from  abroad,  you  say;  but  they  must 
go  through  his  reason  and  conscience,  and  with  the  well-developed  mind, 
the  well-balanced  mind,  the  will  is  guided  by  them,  that  is  to  say,  the  will 
is  free.  Will,  reason  and  conscience  are  no  three  things,  they  are  the 
functions  of  the  same  soul.  In  the  mind  symmetrically  developed,  reason 
decides  correctly,  in  perfect  consonance  with  the  conscience;  and  directs  the 
will,  as  the  compass  directs  the  ship.  To  rise  to  self-conscious  immor- 
tality and  happiness  is  in  man's  power  exclusively ;  it  depends  on  no  cir- 
cumstances and  no  outer  influences.  Man  is  to  all  intents  and  purposes  a 
free  and  independent  being.  This  is  the  answer  of  reason  to  our  moment- 
ous questions,  decisive  to  all  who  believe  in  God  and  man's  God-like  na- 
ture. The  gifts  of  grace  are  all  in  man  and  in  all  men. 

Does  the  Sinaic  revelation  teach  the  same  doctrine?  We  think  it  does. 
Revelation  and  reason  must  not  contradict  each  other.  Still  we  can  not 
answer  this  query  until  we  shall  have  examined  into  the  means  of  sal- 
vation. 

The  first  means  of  salvation,  they  say,  is  faith.     But  faith  is  too  indefi- 


—  96  — 

nite  and  homonymous  a  term  ;  none  can  fix  its  meaning  exactly.  It  meant 
one  thing  with  Paul  and  another  with  the  Church  of  history,  one  thing 
with  St.  Augustine  and  another  with  Albertus  Magnup,  one  thing  with  the 
Catholic  and  another  with  the  Protestant  Church,  while  in  its  dogmatic 
sense  it  has  no  meaning  for  the  non-Christian.  The  first  means  of  salva- 
tion, known  to  all  and  understood  by  all,  is  the  desire  of  man  to  worship 
God.  This  desire  or  volition  has  its  origin  in  two  facts  of  the  conscious- 
ness, viz  :  the  consciousness  of  God  as  the  Supreme  Being,  on  whose  power, 
wisdom  and  goodness  we  depend,  and  whose  greatness  and  glory  we  ad- 
mire ;  and  secondly  the  consciousness  of  man's  spiritual  and  God-like  na- 
ture, his  revelation  and  accountability  to  God,  his  admiration  and  venera- 
tion of  the  loftiest  ideal  of  the  good  and  the  true.  This  desire  or  volition 
to  worship  God  is  the  ground  form  of  religion.  It  is  not  the  inactive  faith, 
belief  or  confidence  in  the  Supreme  Being,  nor  is  it  a  mere  emotion  or  effect 
produced  by  external  agency.  It  is  a  free-will  motion  of  the  soul  seeking 
communion  with  God,  rising,  as  it  were,  above  this  world's  fluctuations, 
above  its  own  earthly  habitation  to  the  world  of  spirit  and  eternity.  This 
desire  or  volition  to  worship,  so  common  to  man,  is  the  impetus,  the  incen- 
tive to  the  soul  to  seek  spiritual  food  in  the  domain  of  spirit,  to  develop,  to 
grow,  to  proceed  and  progress  on  the  path  toward  human  perfection  and 
happiness.  To  this  end  and  purpose,  to  speak  teleologicully,  this  desire  was 
impressed  on  human  nature.  One  might  say,  if  you  wish  to  ascertain 
how  far  you  have  advanced  to  immortality  and  happiness,  measure  your 
desire  or  volition  to  worship  God,  and  you  have  the  solution  of  the 
problem. 

Does  the  Sinaic  revelation  maintain  that  this  holy  desire  of  man  comes 
from  an  agency  outside  of  himself  ?  Does  it  prescribe  the  methods  and 
forms  in  which  a  man  should  worship  God?  It  does  neither,  although  it  be- 
gins with  the  solemn  and  impressive  lesson  teaching  the  One  Eternal  God 
and  Providence,  and  by  its  very  fact  of  God  communicating  with  man  im- 
presses one  forcibly  and  indelibly  with  man's  God-like  nature.  It  simply 
prohibits  the  having  or  making  of  gods,  or  believing  in  any  besides  Jeho- 
vah, and  commands  not  to  show  them  that  honor  which  is  due  only  to  the 
GREAT  I  AM.  These  honors  are  expressed  in  two  simple  terms,  the  first  of 
which  is  subjective,  Lo  Thishtachaveh,  personal  service  or  worship ;  and  the 
second  is  objective,  Lo  Tho'obdem,  worship  by  objective  deeds.  So  we  know 
that  in  the  Sinaic  revelation  Israel  was  commanded  to  worship  God  sub- 
jectively and  objectively,  with  the  inner  emotions  and  motions  of  man,  and 
with  outward  deeds.  Both  points  are  expounded  in  Deuteronomy  vi.  5,  in 
the  Shema.  Concerning  the  subjective  point  it  is  ordained,  "  And  thou 
shalt  love  Jehovah  thy  Elohim  with  all  thy  heart,  with  all  thy  soul,  and  all 


-97- 

thy  might ";  and  concerning  the  objective  point,  it  is  commanded  that  man, 
should  perpetually  have  the  laws  of  God  upon  his  heart,  impress  them  on 
his  children,  speak  freely  and  clearly  of  them,  and  make  them  known  to 
his  fellow-man  by  all  lawful  means  of  impressing  them.  That  is  all  the 
form  of  worship  contained  in  the  Sinaic  revelation,  to  which  was  added 
the  permission  to  erect  an  altar  of  earth,  simple  and  transitory,  because 
the  whole  civilized  world  then  worshiped  by  sacrifices,  which  was  a  mere 
permission  without  the  intention  of  permanency. 

When  Moses  constructed  a  state  with  its  policy  and  polity  upon  the  Sinaic 
principles  with  special  reference  to  the  wants  and  habits  of  his  people  then 
and  there,  he  organized  for  them  a  sacrificial  culte  with  a  special  priest- 
hood, similar  to  what  they  had  seen  and  venerated  in  Egypt;  although  in 
ordaining  those  laws  he  certainly  could  not  think  of  permanency,  as  none 
could  prescribe  for  all  coming  generations  how  to  worship.  Forms  and 
methods  change ;  eternal  in  these  laws  is  only  the  Sinaic  command,  that 
man  should  worship  God  both  subjectively  and  objectively,  in  himself  and 
by  good  deeds  outside  of  himself.  Therefore  the  methods  and  forms  of  di- 
vine worship  changed  so  often  in  Israel  and  among  all  denominations  believ- 
ing in  the  Sinaic  revelation.  The  principle,  however,  remained  that  worship 
must  be  intelligent,  humane  and  spiritual,  within  the  soul  and  by  its  own 
promptings  and  the  manifestation  of  good,  noble  and  generous  deeds ;  to 
Jehovah  only  and  none  besides  Him. 

Here  is  one  of  the  means  of  grace,  its  name  is  divine  worship,  free,  noble, 
intelligent  and  humane.  The  Sinaic  revelation  acknowledges  this  as  the 
first  means  of  grace,  to  rouse  the  soul  to  human  perfection,  to  immortality 
and  the  happiness  of  perfection.  In  this  point,  you  see,  the  Sinaic  revela- 
tion fully  corresponds  with  the  dicta  of  reason.  There  is  no  hostility  and 
no  conflict  between  reason  and  revelation.  The  gifts  of  grace  are  in  man, 
and  his  is  the  freedom  and  ability  to  make  proper  use  of  them. 

I  am  sorry  that  I  can  not  finish  my  subject  this  evening,  and  beg  you  to 
hear  me  again  on  this  subject  next  Friday  evening. 

•    «  '  N 

13 


XV. 

GIFTS  OF  GRACE,  REDEMPTION  AND  SALVATION. 

PART  II. 

The  innate  desire  of  man  to  worship  is  a  gift  of  grace  bestowed  upon  him 
by  his  Maker.  It  is  in  him,  part  and  parcel  of  his  very  nature.  It  remains 
with  him  from  the  early  dawn  of  consciousness  to  the  hour  of  death.  It 
rouses  him  to  seek  that  which  is  higher  and  holier  than  carnal  pleasures, 
to  long  for  the  eternal  and  absolute,  and  prompts  him  to  yearn  after  spir- 
itual nutriment,  on  which  the  soul  grows,  thrives,  develops  and  rises  to  hu- 
man perfection  and  happiness,  immortality  and  bliss.  It  is  the  most  efficient 
gift  of  grace.  As  soon  as  one  begins  to  think  correctly  of  God,  his  own  soul, 
and  the  relation  of  both,  he  becomes  a  better  man ;  inasmuch  as  he  rises 
above  the  vulgar  venality  and  sensuality  of  his  animal  nature,  steps,  so  to 
say,  outside  of  -himself,  and  seeks  an  ideal  of  perfection  above  himself. 
When  this  fundamental  knowledge  moves  his  will  to  that  intense  volition 
to  worship,  to  admire,  to  venerate  and  to  adore  that  highest  ideal  of  perfec- 
tion, he  has  become  wide  awake  to  the  destiny  of  man,  to  develop  and  train 
himself  to  an  immortal  being,  a  pure  and  self-conscious  personality.  He  is 
on  his  way  to  salvation.  The  desire  to  worship  is  the  first  gift  of  grace,  the 
innate  means  to  rise  from  earth  to  heaven,  from  darkness  to  light,  from 
brutal  selfishness  to  human  perfection,  from  Sheol  to  the  presence  of  the 
Most  High.  It  is  the  only  form  of  resurrection  of  which  we  can  form  a  dis- 
tinct idea.  Man  rises  from  his  cosmic  existence  to  the  dignity  of  a  spiritual 
personality,  as  the  planet  emerges  from  the  boundless  sea  of  cosmic  matter 
to  the  condition  of  an  individual  body. 

The  struggle  between  sensuality  and  spirituality,  selfishness  and  univer- 
sality, darkness  and  light,  death  and  immortality,  is  in  the  nature  of  man. 
He  could  not  be  man  without  it;  he  would  be  either  brute  or  angel.  He 
could  not  have  a  free  will,  hence  his  virtues  and  vices  would  be  equally  in- 
different. We  can  not  tell  why  it  is  so,  but  we  know  that  it  is  so;  nor  do 
we  know  about  any  existence  why  it  is  so,  we  can  only  know  that  it  is  so. 
The  moral  law  is  based  upon  that  existent  struggle.  The  education  of  man 
is  accomplished  under  it.  His  goodness  is  the  sum  total  of  victories  in  this 
perpetual  combat.  His  wickedness  is  made  up  of  the  defeats  which  he  sus- 
tained. No  man  is  without  his  victories,  none  without  his  defeats  in  this 
process  of  life,  the  dialectics  of  antitheses,  the  continual  culmination  of  het- 


—  99  — 

erogeneous  elements.  The  sinless  man  is  a  fantasm,  a  theological  fiction, 
like  the  mathematical  point  and  the  atom  in  science,  a  thought-thing  with- 
out reality.  Dogmatics  fancied  a  sinless  man,  who,  as  a  legitimate  sequence, 
had  to  be  made  a  god  ;  for  a  sinless  man  is  something  like  a  mountain  with- 
out a  valley,  which  is  simply  unthinkable. 

In  this  struggle  between  good  and  evil,  in  which  man  is  engaged  to  the 
very  moment  of  his  death,  he  is  given  a  natural  ally  which  is  another  gift  of 
grace ;  its  name  is  repentance.  Like  the  desire  of  worship  the  feeling  of 
repentance  is  specifically  human,  not  a  trace  of  which  is  discernible  in  the 
individuals  of  the  two  organic  kingdoms.  Man,  he  often  knows  not  why, 
repents  his  misdeeds,  and  he  does  so  by  his  own  free  will,  by  peculiar  emo 
tions  of  his  conscience.  Instinctively  he  feels  dissatisfied,  a  feeling  of  shame 
comes  over  him,  which  is  followed  by  remorse  and  not  seldom  by  self-con- 
tempt and  the  ardent  wish  not  to  have  committed  that  misdeed.  First  he  sus- 
pects that  every  man  knows  of  his  wickedness,  so  that  the  slightest  allusion 
to  it,  or  even  an  accidental  word,  irritates  and  mortifies  him  ;  until  it  dawns 
in  his  soul  that  the  all-seeing  eye  of  God  beholds  the  deeds  of  man  and 
nothing  is  hidden  before  it.  Then  awakens  in  him  that  burning  pain  which 
has  driven  so  many  to  despair,  madness  and  self-destruction ;  that  undeni- 
able hell-fire,  which  consumes  the  marrow  of  life  and  burneth  to  the  lowest 
Sheol.  It  follows  him  on  the  path  of  life  like  an  evil  demon,  it  retires  with 
him  to  his  solitary  chamber,  troubles  him  in  his  dreams,  and  rises  with  him 
from  his  couch  to  torment  him  again. 

Repentance,  this  most  humiliating  and  most  aggravating  of  all  feelings, 
rises  in  man;  it  comes  not  from  without;  rises  from  the  free  will  and  the 
consciousness  of  the  good  in  man,  to  war  upon  his  own  wickedness,  his 
own  misdeeds;  to  burn  them  out  of  his  soul ;  to  turn  him  away  from  the 
path  of  evil ;  to  prompt  him  to  seek  a  higher  standard  of  rectitude  and  a 
firmer  will  to  be  guided  by  it ;  and  wherever  it  may  be  possible  to  repair 
the  mischief  done  and  obliterate  the  cause  and  effect  of  sin.  It  is  the  gift 
of  grace  given  alike  to  Jew  and  Christian,  Mohammedan  and  Pagan.  It  is 
roused  in  man  by  a  number  of  causes,  many  of  which  are  seemingly  acci- 
dental ;  but  it  is  chiefly  aroused  in  him  by  the  exercise  of  the  first  gift  of 
grace,  viz:  the  desire  to  worship.  He  places  himself  before  God;  he 
stands  before  the  All-just;  he  compares  himself  with  the  Most  High;  he 
attempts  to  commune  and  to  converse  with  the  Most  Holy ;  he  must  neces- 
sarily become  aware  of  his  own  faults  and  shortcomings,  and  behold  the 
writing  on  the  wall,  Menai,  Menai,  TheJcel,  Upharsin.  It  is  this  natural  as- 
sociation of  ideas,  and  not  either  circumcision  or  baptism,  either  a  par- 
ticular act  of  grace  or  the  function  of  a  holy  ghost  or  a  personal  Yetzer  hat- 
tob;  either  this  or  that  particular  form  of  worship  which  rouses  in  man 


—  100  — 

this  second  gift  of  grace,  repentance,  from  potentiality  to  actuality.  In 
this  connection  it  certainly  depends  not  upon  how  he  worships,  it  depends 
upon  what  he  worships.  The  form  is  indifferent.  If  one  worships  the 
Most  Holy  God,  the  God  of  justice  and  truth,  the  Eternal  God  of  the  Sinaic 
revelation  whose  insignia  are  truth,  justice  and  purity,  worship  must  lead 
him  to  repentance  of  sin,  with  or  without  sacrifices,  fasts  or  sacraments.  t 

Few  men  will  deny  that  the  consciousness  of  guilt  and  crime  with  its 
shame,  remorse,  self-contempt,  genuine  and  sincere  repentance  is  the  only 
knowable  hell-fire.  The  doubts  begin  with  the  question,  Does  repentance 
work  atoneme'nt?  or,  in  other  words,  does  God  forgive  sins  because  the 
sinner  repents?  This  is  a  point  of  "  Disagreement "  among  the  various  de- 
nominations. The  ancient  teachers  of  Judaism  maintained  En  Vcho  Dabar 
she-omed  mippenei  hat-Theshuba.  "  Nothing  (no  sin)  can  stand  before  re- 
pentance." Repentance  wipes  out  every  guilt,  it  burns  out  every  sin.  It 
is  the  baptism  with  fire.  They  prescribed  various  means  to  assist  the  effi- 
cacy of  repentance,  like  confession,  humiliation  before  God  and  man  (no 
auricular  confession),  prayer,  fasting  and  abstinence  in  general,  the  giving 
of  alms,  and  practicing  other  humanitarian  benevolence,  exercising  the 
mind  in  the  study  of  God's  law,  and  such  other  means ;  but  they  are  the 
means  only  to  express  and  actualize  the  change  of  mind  and  to  strengthen 
the  will  of  the  sinner,  in  walking  steadfastly  on  the  path  of  righteousness, 
and  are  of  no  avail  without  the  main  gift  of  grace,  viz  :  sincere  and  genuine 
repentance  of  misdeeds  and  the  thorough  change  of  mind.  They  learned 
this  of  the  ancient  Prophets  of  Israel,  who  knew  of  no  other  means  to  ob- 
literate sin  besides  repentance  and  change  of  mind.  Neither  sacrifices  nor 
fasts,  neither  afflictions  nor  prayers  were  looked  upon  by  them  as  means  of 
atonement.  In  all  forms  of  speech  they  called  men  to  repentance,  and 
promised  in  the  most  beautiful  metaphors  remission  of  sins  to  the  repent- 
ing sinner.  Those  ancient  teachers  and  prophets  understood  the  Laws  of 
Moses  to  the  effect  that  the  sacrifices  and  the  observances  connected  there- 
with were  mere  symbols,  simple  means  in  correspondence  with  that  age 
and  its  tastes,  to  express  and  actualize  the  change  of  mind,  to  strengthen 
and  satisfy  the  morbid  will  of  the  sinner.  Sin  is  subjective  ;  God  is  not  of- 
fended^; man  is  lowered  and  disgraced  by  it.  Repentance  is  self-punish- 
ment and  self-elevation.  It  purges  the  soul  and  starts  it  on  its  upward  way 
to  God  and  righteousness.  In  so  far  as  sin  is  objective  in  its  effects  upon 
our  fellow-men,  it  is  the  penitent's  duty  to  repair  the  breach,  to  amend  the 
damage  and  appease  the  injured  fellow-man.  The  penitent  must  obliterate 
both  the  cause  and  the  effect  of  his  sins.  The  penitent  punishes  and  cor- 
rects himself.  If  he  succeeds  therein  every  other  punishment  or  correction 
would  be  unjust  and  unnecessary,  and  mast  not  be  expected  of  the  All-just 


—  101  - 

God,  of  whom  we  are  told  :  "  The  Rock,  perfect  are  His  doings,  for  all  his 
ways  are  justice,  a  God  of  faithfulness  and  no  wrong,  righteous  and  up- 
right is  He." 

Mohammedanism,  in  the  main,  adopted  this  Jewish  idea  of  remission  of 
sins  by  repentance,  although  it  proposes  other  means  in  addition  to  those 
of  the  Jewish  prophets  and  rabbis.  In  the  New  Testament  both  John  and 
Jesus  announce  the  coming  of  the  Kingdom  of  Heaven  by  repentance.  The 
idea  of  vicarious  atonement  is  the  product  of  the  Christianity  of  histor}', 
not  of  its  founder  or  founders,  as  I  believe  I  have  proved  in  my  little  book, 
u  The  Martyrdom  of  Jesus  of  Nazareth,"  and  I  do  not  like  to  repeat  my  own 
arguments.  This  ex-post  facto  speculation  forms  the  main  body  of  Chris- 
tian dogmatics,  and  is  based  upon  the  hypothesis  that  the  death  of  the 
Messiah  must  have  been  a  special  act  of  Providence  for  some  specific  pur- 
pose. Gradually  the  expounders  persuaded  themselves  into  the  belief  that 
he  died  as  a  sacrifice  of  atonement  for  the  sins  of  others.  The  idea  sug- 
gested itself  from  an  ancient  belief  of  Semitic  Pagans,  like  the  King  of 
Moab,  who  sacrificed  the  sons  of  kings  to  obviate  national  calamities,  and 
was  utilized  to  convert  Heathen  and  also  Jews,  after  the  altar  had  been  de- 
stroyed, the  ancient  polity  abrogated,  and  they  were  left  without  their 
time-honored  form  of  worship.  It  belongs  to  the  class  of  means ;  it  is  not 
principle,  and  is  without  the  least  foundation  in  Moses,  the  Prophets,  the 
Rabbis,  Jesus  and  even  Paul.  The  Sinaic  revelation  informs  us  that  only 
one  sin,  viz :  taking  the  name  of  God  in  vain,  is  so  grievous  that  God 
would  not  hold  him  guiltless  who  commits  it.  This,  of  course,  suggests 
that  other  sins  are  forgiven,  as  it  is  plainly  stated  in  the  supplementary 
revelation,  "  He  forgiveth  iniquity,  transgression  and  sin."  But  the  idea 
of  vicarious  atonement  has  no  foothold  in  that  revelation.  Therefore,  the 
Christian  theologians  adopted  the  whole  Jewish  theory  of  the  remission  of 
sins,  and  added  the  vicarious  atonement,  which  appears  superfluous  to  Jews 
and  Mohammedans.  Moses  informs  us  that  God  said  to  him,  when  he  of- 
fered himself  as  a  vicarious  atonement,  "  Him,  who  sinned  unto  me,  will  I 
blot  out  from  my  book."  The  Prophet  Ezekiel  said,  "  The  person  that  sin- 
neth,  he  shall  be  put  to  death."  Justice  dictates  that  the  guilty  one  be 
punished,  and  not  the  innocent  instead  of  the  guilty.  Reason  responds,  if 
the  effect  of  sin  is  in  me,  a  stain  in  my  soul,  it  can  no  more  be  removed  by 
the  meritorious  deeds  of  another  person  than  I  could  be  cured  of  any  dis- 
ease by  the  remedy  which  my  physician  swallows.  If  sin  is  a  negative 
quantity,  that  I  have  so  much  less  spiritual  substance  in  my  soul  as  I  have 
neglected  my  duties  to  God  and  man,  neglected  to  increase  and  grow  in 
goodness  and  enlightenment;  then  all  the  surplus  which  others  might  pos- 
sess, can  as  little  replace  the  deficiency  in  me  as  the  years  of  his  life  could 


—  102  — 

be  added  to  mine,  or  mine  to  his,  to  make  up  any  relative  deficiency.  If 
the  solidarity  of  mankind  goes  so  far  that  all  mankind  has  but  one  soul,  as 
some  Christian  theologians  advanced,  and  God  or  his  Son  died  for  the  sin 
of  that  all-soul ;  then  the  individual  can  not  commit  sin,  and  needs  no 
atonement,  and  the  death  of  the  Son  is  the  atonement  for  all,  Heathens, 
cannibals,  murderers,  Jews  and  infidels  included,  and  whatever  we  poor 
mortals  do  is  perfectly  indifferent,  as  the  all-soul  or  the  soul  of  all  is  re- 
deemed anyhow.  We  can  find  no  reason  for  the  doctrine  of  vicarious 
atonement,  either  Scriptural  or  philosophical,  and  we  have  no  need  of  any 
hypothesis,  doctrine  or  dogma  to  explain  the  life  and  death,  the  work  and 
offices  of  the  Messiah,  his  godhead  or  manhood,  his  resurrection  or  second 
advent,  as  we  who  stand  upon  the  standpoint  of  the  Sinaic  revelation  and 
reason  need  no  Messiah  whatever,  and  no  Messianic  doctrines  in  any  form, 
as  I  believe  I  have  proved  in  my  last  course  of  lectures  "  On  the  Origin 
and  History  of  the  Messianic  Idea."  We  propose  to  believe  as  much  as  we 
rationally  can,  and  no  more.  When  we  are  asked  to  believe  and  to  do 
more  than  is  necessary,  more  than  is  reasonable,  we  must  beg  to  be  excused. 
You  see  we  all  agree  in  principle,  viz,  that  sins  are  forgiven.  We  also 
agree  that  there  could  be  no  remission  of  sins  without  sincere  and  genuine 
repentance.  We  furthermore  agree  in  most  of  the  means,  such  as  humilia- 
tion before  God  and  man,  confession,  giving  alms  and  the  like.  But  we  dis- 
agree in  other  means,  and  the  dogma  of  vicarious  atonement  is  no  more 
than  that.  From  this  one  "  Disagreement "  many  others  arise,  so  many,  in- 
deed, that  they  divide  the  believers  in  the  Sinaic  revelation  into  three  main 
religious  bodies  and  numerous,  small  factions  or  sects.  This  makes  of 
Christianity  a  tribal  and  sectional  religion  in  conflict  with  man's  reason. 
Therefore,  those  who  believe  in  the  universal  and  eternal  character  of  the 
Sinaic  revelation  and  the  final  triumph  of  God's  truth  can  hardly  doubt 
that  this  "  Disagreement"  also  will  be  overcome,  and  the  religion  of  the 
future  man  will  contain  no  Christology.  The  future  man  will  need  no 
Messiah  and  no  redeemer,  no  baptism  and  no  circumcision,  no  months,  no 
weeks,  no  days  of  fasting  and  atonement,  and  no  sacraments  of  bread  and 
wine,  no  mediator  in  Heaven  and  none  on  earth,  no  priest  and  no  rites,  in 
order  to  secure  salvation  for  his  soul ;  for  neither  of  all  these  and  all  other 
means  are  contained  in  the  Sinaic  revelation  or  based  upon  the  pure  dicta 
of  reason.  Whatever  is  not  either  in  revelation  or  reason  is  of  the  sponta- 
neous generation  of  fancy  and  purely  accidental.  Fantasms  and  acci- 
dental productions  last  as  long  as  they  are  serviceable  to  man,  so  long  and 
no  longer,  the  true  only  is  eternal,  and  this  must  be  found  either  in  reason 
or  revelation.  The  future  man,  if  our  means  of  preservation  and  com- 
munication be  not  miraculously  destroyed,  will  see  the  noonday  of  en- 


-  103  — 

lightenment,  discard  all  superstitions  and  recognize  means  as  mere  means> 
forms  of  a  transitory  nature ;  then  "  Agreement  "  will  grow  out  of  "  Dis- 
agreement," and  I  venture  to  say  the  following  articles  of  faith  will  satisfy 
the  most  pious  souls : 

1.  I  believe  in  One,  Eternal  and  Universal  Jehovah. 

2.  I  believe  in  man's  godlike  nature,  with  capacities  to  become  -free,  just, 
pure,  true,  immortal  and  happy. 

3.  I  believe  in   God's   Law   contained  in  the  Sinaic   revelation  as  the 
standard  of  rectitude,  the  path  of  righteousness,  the  proof  of  God's  provi- 
dence and  man's  immortality  by  his  godlike  nature. 

4.  I  believe  in  man's  desire  to  worship  God  and  the  free  will  repentance 
in  his  own  conscience  as  the  gifts  of  grace,  to  lead  man  onward  to  God  on 
the  path  of  righteousness  and  upward  to  Him,  immortality,  human  perfec- 
tion and  the  happiness  of  perfection. 

5.  I  believe  in  the  freedom  and  equality  of  all  men  as  the  law  of  God 
and  the  final  and  universal  triumph  of  reason,  justice  and  goodness  over 
all  obstacles. 

These  five  articles  of  faith,  I  opine,  will  satisfy  them,  to  which  I  only 
would  wish  to  add,  I  believe  that  ignorance  is  the  original  sin  and  stupidity 
is  universal  depravity,  which  must  be  vanquished  by  free  schools,  free 
press,  free  speech  and  free  thought. 

I  believe  what  all  good  and  great  men  have  said  and  thought  in  their  re- 
spective times  and  places,  provided  I  be  permitted  to  be  my  own  judge  as 
to  what  is  good,  useful,  practicable  and  applicable  also  in  my  time  and 
place..  * 

This  would  complete  the  holy  number  seven,  to  which  nothing  ought  to 
be  added  ;  or  else  I  would  propose  this  No.  8  :  I  believe  all  that  is  neces- 
sary for  man  to  believe,  provided  it  is  not  in  antagonism  with  reason  and 
conscience  and  the  Sinaic  revelation. 

I  do  not  mean  to  say  that  you  should  believe  this  and  no  more,  or  that 
I  do,  for  man  is  in  many  respects  the  product  of  history.  No  man  can  suc- 
cessfully deny  his  parents  and  their  teachings,  although  he  is  in  nowise 
exactly  like  them.  Every  generation  varies  and  progresses.  Gradually 
only  opinions,  like  types,  change.  But  as  both  change  and  progress  after 
all,  the  religion  of  the  future  man,  whenever  that  may  be,  might  be  based 
upon  those  articles  of  faith.  It  is  evident  that  we  are  advancing  to  some 
such  ultimate  point  as  the  universal  republic,  universal  religion,  one  God 
and  one  human  family.  If  the  world  is  satisfied  to  reach  that  objective 
point  at  once,  we  Jews  are  satisfied  and  willing  to  join  the  mutual  benevo- 
lent society  of  all  mankind,  with  the  firm  conviction  that  this  is  the  will 
of  God  and  the  ultimate  destiny  of  man  on  earth. 


XVI. 

THE  JUDAISM  OF  HISTORY. 

Man,  they  maintain,  is  the  creature  of  circumstances.  This  is  true  of 
minors  whose  understanding  is  not  strong  enough  to  resist  the  outer  influ- 
ences and  to  govern  them,  and  of  that  class  of  childlike  people  who  never 
reach  the  estate  of  maturity  and  personal  independence.  The  accom- 
plished man  rises  above  the  circumstances  and  governs  them.  According 
to  the  philosophy  of  Moses  Maimonides  on  Providence,  the  accomplished 
man,  i.  e.,  the  intelligent  and  righteous,  is  governed  by  his  reason,  by 
means  of  which,  and  in  proportion  to  his  perfection,  Providence  is  mani- 
fested in  him  and  counsels  him  ;  while  the  neglected  man,  i.  e.,  the  thought- 
less and  wicked,  is  the  play-ball  of  accident  and  casualty  to  the  same  ex- 
tent as  the  other  individuals  of  the  animal  and  vegetable  kingdoms.  Man 
is  no  more  the  result  of  his  parents  than  the  candle  light  is  the  result  of 
the  gas  flame  at  which  it  was  lit,  or  vice  versa.  He  inherits  dispositions, 
and  no  more  than  that;  and  all  dispositions  are  subject  to  reason  and  con- 
science. Like  Isaac  and  Rebecca,  many  parents  have  two  sons,  or  even 
twin-brothers,  the  one  of  which  becomes  Israel,  "  the  prince  of  the  Lord," 
and  the  other  an  Esau,  a  rough  hunter. 

The  forms  and  methods,  however,  which  are  the  instruments  and  imple- 
ments of  reason  and  conscience  to  become  actualized  and  influential,  are  of 
slow  growth.  They  are  constructed  and  crystalized  by  experience  and  re- 
peated application,  hence  they  are  inherited  from  generation  to  generation. 
Reason  and  conscience  submit  to  them  only  by  the  force  of  authority,  the 
authority  of  parents  and  teachers,  political  and  church  government,  tradi- 
tion and  literature.  Forms  and  methods  are  inherited,  imposed  like  the 
different  styles  of  garments.  Therefore,  we  can  speak  of  a  Judaism,  Chris- 
tianity or  Mohammedanism  of  history,  as  these  religious  systems  devel- 
oped their  peculiar  forms  and  methods  in  course  of  time,  although  all  three 
of  them  started  from  the  Sinaic  revelation ;  without  admitting  for  a  mo- 
ment that  reason  and  conscience  are  not  the  superior  authority,  to  which  to 
appeal  our  right  is  reserved ;  or  that  the  "  Differences  "  in  those  three  re- 
ligious systems  are  not  the  mere  disagreements  in  form  and  method. 

Let  us  review  first  the  Judaism  of  history.  According  to  the  testimony 
of  the  Pentateuch,  Moses  was  the  first  teacher  of  forms  and  methods,  to 
actualize  the  Sinaic  principles,  doctrines  and  laws  for  the  practical  life  of  a 


—  105  — 

nation.  He  built  up  a  State  upon  the  underlying  principles  of  the  moral 
law  with  its  two  pillars  of  freedom  and  equality ;  and  a  religion  with  its 
polity  upon  the  basis  of  pure  monotheism,  the  most  high  and  most  holy 
One  in  covenant  with  Israel.  Like  all  eminent  statesmen  and  legislators, 
he  was  obliged  to  do  justice  to  inherited  forms,  methods  and  institutions, 
and  subordinated  them  to  the  system  on  which  he  built.  While  in  the 
construction  of  the  State  and  the  laws,  he  was  obliged  to  accept  slavery, 
bigamy,  the  avenger  of  blood,  the  law  of  retaliation,  the  right  of  conquest 
and  other  heritages ;  he  modified  them  according  to  the  underlying  prin- 
ciple, abolishing  slavery  among  the  Hebrews  and  protecting  the  heathen 
slave  by  humane  enactments;  establishing  the  freedom  and  equal  rights  of 
woman,  to  counteract  polygamy,  and  ordaining  monogamy  for  the  priest 
as  a  pattern  to  the  people ;  the  cities  of  refuge  to  counteract  the  barbarity 
of  bloody  revenge;  the  ransom  with  money  in  the  case  of  bodily  injuries, 
to  modify  the  law  of  retaliation;  the  system  of  voluntary  military  service 
exclusively,  with  laws  to  protect  the  lives  of  non-combatants,  property  and 
female  chastity,  in  case  of  war  to  counteract  wars  of  conquest,  and  so  on. 
There  was  so  much  barbarism  to  be  obliterated  that  he  could  not  overcome 
all  of  it  at  once.  He  did  the  same  thing  precisely  in  the  religious  institu- 
tions. He  crmld  not  eradicate  the  ancient  and  universal  form  of  worship 
by  bloody  sacrifices,  and  could  only  regulate  and  modify  it  in  accordance 
with  the  underlying  Sinaic  principles.  He  gave  them  a  harmless  priest- 
hood, which  was  a  mere  shadow  of  the  mighty  priesthood  of  Egypt.  At 
the  same  time  he  taught  them  two  other  forms  of  worship,  one  in  the  prac- 
tice of  charity  and  benevolence,  and  another  in  maintaining  and  preserv- 
ing the  Law,  the  rights,  claims,  liberties,  intelligence,  morality,  happiness 
and  well-being  of  God's  chosen  people,  the  perpetuation  of  the  divine  cove- 
nant. He  taught  them  that  the  objective  form  of  divine  worship  consists 
not  of  the  sacrifices  only;  charity  and  benevolence,  justice  and  righteous- 
ness, the  protection  of  freedom  and  the  advancement  of  enlightenment  are 
other  forms  of  divine  worship  no  less  acceptable  to  the  most  high  and  most 
holy  God  than  any  other  form. 

The  Israelites  obeyed  or  rebelled,  went  through  periods  of  national  glory 
and  happiness  or  degradation  and  misery.  The  logical  and  illogical  ele- 
ments, the  Sinaic  revelation  and  the  world's  Paganism,  the  civilizing  and 
enlightening  agency  of  the  laws  of  Moses  and  the  barbarism  of  the  sur- 
rounding nation?,  light  and  darkness  collided  in  the  course  of  history,  so 
that  the  one  now  and  the  other  then  was  victorious  in  Israel.  When  idol- 
atry and  despotism  domineered  on  the  one  side,  and  on  the  other  the  sacri- 
ficial culte  degenerated  into  another  form  of  Paganism,  the  Prophets  arose 

14 


—  106  - 

and  thundered  those  divine  messages  into  the  ears  of  the  deluded  masses, 
corrupt  priests  and  kings,  called  them  back  home  to  the  Sinaic  revelation,  the 
divine  covenant,  the  wise  and  benevolent  laws  of  Moses,  and  Judaism  became 
in  their  hand  a  purely  spiritual  religion,  as  its  essence  is,  without  any  par- 
ticular forms  besides  those  advanced  by  Moses  to  counterpoise  the  sacri- 
ficial polity.  Besides  Ezekiel,  who  proposed  reforms  in  the  institutions  of 
public  worship,  which,  however,  were  never  adopted,  the  Prophets  advo- 
cated no  kind  of  forms  and  methods,  so  that  Judaism  became  purely  spir- 
itual in  their  hands.  Therefore,  they  succeeded  only  in  improving  the 
morals,  enlightening  the  minds,  correcting  abuses,  diminishing  the  impor- 
tance attached  to  forms,  and  directing  the  minds  to  the  essence  and  import 
of  the  Law ;  and  could  not  change  practically  anything  either  in  the  form 
of  government  or  in  the  inherited  forms  and  methods  in  general.  The 
progress  achieved  was  in  the  spreading  spirituality  and  the  clearer  concep- 
tions of  the  religious  and  moral  truths  among  the  accessible  portion  of  the 
people,  and  stirring  up  that  national  self-consciousness  which  saved  the  na- 
tion from  utter  amalgamation  with  the  surrounding  nationalities,  and 
then  among  those  of  Assyria  and  Babylonia. 

[Permit  me  to  remark  here  that  th^  peculiar  hypothesis  of  modern  critics 
who  set  Moses  after  the  Prophets  is  historically  illegitimate  and  philo- 
sophically untenable;  because  there  is  no  cause  to  assume  that  the  writers 
of  the  sacred  history  did  not  know  better  than  their  critics  of  from  two 
thousand  to  three  thousand  years  later;  no  cause  to  assume  that  the  au- 
thors of  the  holiest  books  of  mankind  were  willful  impostors;  no  cause  to 
assume  that  the  lottiest  and  purely  spiritual  aspect  of  any  religion  or  code 
of  laws  preceded  its  concrete,  practical  and  popular  state.] 

After  fifty  years  of  captivity  in  Babylon,  forty  two  thousand  men,  with 
their  families,  returned  to  Palestine  to  re-establish  the  Hebrew  people  upon 
its  ancient  soil.  The  first  public  act  of  theirs  was  to  rebuild  the  altar  and 
then  the  temple,  and  revive  the  ancient  form  of  worship,  precisely  as  it  was 
before.  They  would  not  and  could  not  change  the  form,  although  besides 
the  law  of  the  covenant,  the  doctrine  and  laws  of  the  Sinaic  revelation, 
they  made  no  attempt  to  introduce  again  the  Mosaic  law.  Seventy  years 
later,  when  Ezra  and  then  Nehemiah  came  to  Palestine,  the  laws  of  Moses 
considerably  modified  were  reintroduced,  together,  however,  with  new  en- 
actments and  methods.  It  was  a  new  phase  of  Judaism,  which  was  again 
considerably  modified  by  the  advance  of  Grecian  culture  into  Asia,  from  and 
after  the  time  of  Alexander  the  Great.  Persian,  and  afterward  Grecian  ele- 
ments, amalgamated  with  purely  Jewish.  The  Scribes  gradually  took  the 
place  of  the  priests  and  prophets.  They  expounded  the  Law  and  also  the 
Prophets,  thu&  expounded  and  translated,  it  was  no  longer  the  living  orig- 


-  107- 

ina'l.  The  additions  and  changes  in  the  temple  service  were  numerous  and 
characteristic.  The  synagogues  replaced  the  altars  upon  the  "  Heights," 
the  Thorah  replaced  the  Ark  of  the  Covenant,  prayers,  hymns  and  music, 
teaching  and  expounding  assumed  the  importance  of  sacrifices  and  priestly 
rites,  and  gradually  a  new  phase  of  Judaism  took  root  among  the  people. 
The  attempt  at  a  sudden  and  abrupt  change  of  forms  and  methods  by 
Grecized  Hebrews  and  Antiochus  Epiphanes  with  his  lieutenants,  led  to  the 
remarkable  rebellion  under  the  Maccabees  and  resulted  in  a  complete  vic- 
tory of  the  orthodox  element  and  the  independence  -of  the  country.  But 
the  natural  and  gradual  change  of  forms  and  methods  remained  the  very 
same  as  before,  and  went  on  without  restriction.  New  laws  were  made,  new 
customs  established,  new  methods  were  invented  to  expound  the  ancient 
laws,  new  forms  took  the  place  of  the  older,  and  new  parties,  Pharisees, 
Sadducees  and  Essenes,  stepped  in  with  new  issues.  When  finally  the  He- 
brew commonwealth  was  overthrown,  the  capital,  temple  and  altar  were  de- 
stroyed, the  ancient  polity  was  abrogated,  the  casement  was  broken,  and 
the  new  form  and  method  of  Judaism,  gradually  developed  during  previous 
centuries,  at  once  took  the  place  of  the  older  forms  and  methods  which  had 
been  dropped  or  changed  gradually,  imperceptibly  and  naturally.  It  ap- 
peared as  rabbinical  Judaism  on  the  one  hand,  and  as  Messianic  or  dena- 
tionalized Judaism,  afterward  Christianity,  on  the  other  hand.  The  litera- 
tures on  both  sides  are  the  Mishnah,  Tosephta.  Mechilta,  Saphra,  Siphri  and 
some  minor  books  on  the  part  of  the  Jews,  and  the  New  Testament  on 
the  part  of  the  Messiahists.  Both  literatures  were  committed  to  writing 
nearly  simultaneously,  in  the  second  century  of  the  Christian  Era.  That 
Jewish  literature  mentioned  contains  the  forms  and  methods,  the  laws,  cus- 
toms, doctrines  and  peculiar  opinions  of  that  new  phase  of  Judaism  together 
with  the  history  of  that  evolution  and  reconstruction,  and  many  reminis- 
cences and  episodes  scientific,  historical,  homiletical  and  juridical.  That 
literature  cast  the  new  phase  of  Judaism  into  a  stereotyped  form,  just  as  the 
New  Testament  was  the  stereotyped  form  for  the  other  side,  from  which 
gradually  rose  the  Christianity  of  history.  The  principal  work  done  by  the 
rabbis  or  Tana'im  of  the  first  and  second  centuries  was  to  collect,  compile, 
criticise  and  systematize  the  material  left  from  the  Second  Commonwealth  of 
the  Hebrews.  This  material,  however,  was  but  partly  written  and  in  a  variety 
of  scrolls.  Much  of  it  was  verbally  preserved  and  communicated  tradition- 
ally, and  consisted  in  part  of  customs,  maxims  and  precepts  not  found  di- 
rectly in  the  Bible.  It  was  believed,  however  that  "  The  custom  of  Israel  is 
law,"  hence  every  existing  custom,  maxim  or  precept  must  have  its  root  in 
the  lawe  of  Moses.  Special  methods  of  expounding  the  law,  the  Rabbinical 
Hermeneutics,  were  established  not  only  in  order  to  preserve  every  iota  of 


—  108  — 

that  heritage,  but  also  to  prove  that  it  is  all  founded  upon  the  Bible.  This 
apparatus  of  the  Tana'im  is  a  portion  of  the  rabbinical  literature  just  men- 
tioned 

The  teachers  then  certainly  supposed  that  their  labors  had  established 
and  finished  the  new  phase  of  Judaism.  They  may  have  overlooked  that 
the  very  material  which  they  compiled,  systematized  and  codified  was 
the  product  of  evolution;  but  neither  their  cotemporaries  nor  posterity  lost 
sight  of  that  fact  and  that  principle.  Therefore  the  evolution  continued. 
Although  that  literature  of  the  Tana'im  was  accepted  and  indorsed  by  their 
successors,  the  Amoraim  of  Palestine  and  Babylon,  as  the  established  au- 
thority, the  latter  claimed  the  right  to  comparative  criticism,  to  establish 
laws  and  precepts,  and  to  enact  new  ones  to  meet  new  emergencies.  The 
underlying  principle  of  perpetual  development  could  not  be  stopped  by  any 
written  literature.  And  so  the  schools  and  courts  of  law  as  well  as  the  syn- 
agogue produced  commentaries  to  the  rabbinical  material  converted  into 
books,  and  these  commentaries  were  called  Gemara,  '*  the  finishing,"  that 
which  settles  finally  the  law,  precept  or  custom,  and  points  out  their  roots 
and  origin  in  the  Bible.  In  course  of  time,  however,  the  commentaries  be- 
came much  larger  and  more  important  than  the  main  matter.  It  was  also 
supposed  that  the  matter  had  been  exhausted.  The  schools  and  academies 
declined  in  Palestine  through  the  government  of  Christian  emperors  and  the 
continuous  emigration  in  consequence  thereof;  and  in  Babylon  on  account  of 
the  counter-pressure  of  Parseeism  against  Christianity,  which  bore  heavily 
also  upon  the  Jews.  It  was  apprehended  that  "  The  Law  will  be  for- 
gotten," and  the  rabbis  began  again  to  compile  systematically  in  their  own 
way,  both  in  Palestine  and  Babylon.  The  Mishna  was  taken  as  the  main 
text,  and  the  commentaries  were  added  to  each  paragraph  thereof,  together 
with  such  other  ethical,  religious,  historical  and  scientific  fragments  as  the 
compilers  considered  worth  preserving.  Toward  the  end  of  the  fourth  cen- 
tury the  compilation  was  closed  in  Palestine,  and  it  is  called  the  TALMUD 
YERUSHALMI  or  also  the  "  Gemara  of  the  West."  Toward  the  end  of  the 
fifth  century  the  compilation  of  the  Babylonian  rabbis  was  closed  and  called 
the  TALMUD  BABLI.  Other  works,  especially  of  a  homiletic  nature,  called 
Midrashim,  and  established  rituals  were  added,  always  under  the  impression 
that  the  Talmud  and  Midrashim  would  establish  forever  the  forms  and  meth- 
ods of  Judaism. 

Centuries  of  stability  followed.  The  heads  of  Judaism,  men  of  un- 
doubted authority,  resided  in  Babylon.  They  were  called  Saburaim  in  the 
sixth  century,  and  then  Gueonim  down  to  the  end  of  the  tenth  century. 
They  were  holy  men,  learned  in  the  Law.  They  decided  all  questions  ac- 
cording to  the  Talmud  for  the  Jews  of  Asia,  Africa  and  Europe,  and  their 


—  109  — 

decisions  were  laws  for  all  Israel.  The  whole  system  was  apparently  im- 
movable. The  Talmud  reigned  by  its  expounders.  Under  that  surface, 
however,  the  law  of  evolution  continued  its  work.  The  study  of  philosophy, 
science  and  Grecian  literature  among  the  Arabs  had  its  prominent  apostles 
among  the  Jews.  Unexpectedly  there  arose  among  the  Jews  the  sect  of 
the  Karaites,  who  rejected  the  authority  of  the  Talmud  altogether,  and 
among  the  orthodox  new  lights  arose  and  culminated  at  last  in  the  unex- 
pected fact  that  one  of  the  Gueonim,  Saadiah  of  Fiuma,  sanctioned  the 
study  of  philosophy,  and  wrote  a  book  on  the  subject.  This  was  again  the 
beginning  of  a  new  period.  The  office  of  the  Gueonim  was  abrogated.  The 
center  of  Judaism  shifted  from  Asia  into  Europe,  especially  Spain,  France 
and  Germany,  and  the  forms  and  methods  changed  once  more. 

In  Spain,  under  the  sway  of  the  Mohammedans,  a  new  and  vigorous  spirit 
broke  through  the  forms  and  methods  and  built  up  that  philosophical  Ju- 
daism which,  always  remaining  upon  the  ancient  basis  of  the  Sinaic  reve- 
lation, produced  on  the  one  hand  modern  Judaism  and  influenced  Chris- 
tianity on  the  other  hand,  preparing  its  students  for  the  Reformation. 
Those  Spanish  Jews  were  not  only  faithful  believers  in  the  Sinaic  revela- 
tion, but  also  systematic  philosophers,  scientists,  stern  critics  and  honest 
men  beyond  the  reach  of  Pope  and  Council  and  outside  the  magic  circle  of 
rabbinical  and  traditional  forms  and  methods.  While  some  of  the  greatest 
among  them,  together  with  the  French  and  German  rabbis,  cultivated  the 
Talmudical  literature  orthodoxly  and  commented  and  expounded,  criti- 
cised and  codified  the  Talmud  with  more  scientific  skill  than  those  of  Baby- 
lon exercised ;  many  were  engaged  in  expounding  Judaism  from  the 
philosophical  standpoint  and  leading  it  onward  to  new  forms  and  methods. 

Before  we  close  this  lecture,  on  the  Judaism  of  history — lean  not  exhaust 
the  subject  in  one  lecture — let  us  look  back  upon  the  change  of  standpoint 
in  various  ages.  Moses  gave  form  and  method  to  the  substance  of  the 
Sinaic  revelation  in  State  and  Church,  as  it  is  called  now.  The  form  was 
broken  in  the  time  of  Samuel,  when  Saul  was  elected  King  of  Israel,  for 
the  King  has  no  place  in  the  laws  of  Moses.  Whatever  refers  to  a  king  in 
those  laws  is  certainly  of  much  later  origin.  The  methods  were  changed 
by  the  Prophets,  who  insisted  upon  the  spiritual  and  ethical  contents  of  the 
Law,  and  attached  no  importance  to  the  observances  and  ceremonies. 
When  the  Israelites  were  in  captivity  they  did  not  observe  the  ceremonial 
laws  of  Moses,  although  they  adhered  steadfastly  to  the  Sinaic  revelation, 
the  covenant  and  the  promises.  When  they  returned  to  Palestine  the 
Mosaic  law  was  never  introduced  in  all  its  parts,  although  Ezra  and  Nehe- 
miah  insisted  upon  organizing  the  Second  Commonwealth  on  the  same 
basis  as  the  first.  During  the  existence  of  the  Second  Commonwealth  an 


—  110  — 

entirely  new  TUorah  was  developed,  which  found  its  expression  in  the 
Mishnah.  From  the  very  beginning  up  to  this  point,  there  was  no  stability  ; 
there  was  perpetual  change  and  evolution  of  forms  and  methods.  Un- 
changed and  unchangeable  in  this  perpetual  fluctuation  was  only  the  Sinaic 
revelation,  the  covenant.  This  remained  the  same  forever.  Whatever  the 
rabbis  of  the  Talmud  and  their  successors  in  Babylon  did  enact,  introduce? 
write  and  enforce,  did  not  change  an  iota  of  the  Sinaic  revelation  and  the  cove- 
nant, although  it  did  change  laws  and  customs,  forms  and  methods,  re- 
placed the  old  by  new  successors,  always,  however,  in  the  same  spirit  and 
from  the  same  standpoint  that  all  laws,  customs  and  observances  are  sub- 
ject to  change,  because  they  are  mere  forms  and  methods,  however  holy, 
useful  and  beneficial  they  may  be  at  this  or  that  time  or  place ;  eternal  and 
fixed  is  the  word  and  covenant  of  God  alone,  and  both  are  in  the  Sinaic 
revelation.  Among  the  mistakes  which  those  Tanaim  made — every  age 
makes  its  mistakes,  or  else  the  successors  could  find  nothing  to  improve — was 
that  they  compiled  and  imposed  every  law,  custom  and  observance  upon 
the  house  of  Israel  under  the  impression  that  the  nation,  with  all  its  pecu- 
liarities and  elements,  must  be  preserved,  to  be  politically  restored,  which 
they  expected  to  come  to  pass  at  once  or  in  a  very  short  time  by  a  Messiah? 
or  otherwise.  This  made  their  code  too  political  and  too  large,  so  that  the 
religious  and  ethical  elements  are  almost  hidden  under  the  mountain  of 
political  laws.  The  Christian  writers  dropped  the  political  element  alto- 
gether, and  attended  to  the  religious  and  ethical  exclusively  ;  therefore,  the 
New  Testament,  which  in  fact  contains  no  more  of  it,  spread  more  rapidly 
than  the  rabbinical  writings.  This  mistake  maintained  its  hold  upon  the 
Judaism  of  history,  and  still  adheres  to  its  orthodoxy.  The  Spanish  school 
of  Jewish  reasoners  began  to  correct  that  mistake,  and  thus  became  the 
source  and  starting-point  of  modern  Judaism,  as  I  expect  to  explain  in 
my  next  lecture,  to  which  you  are  respectfully  invited. 


XVII. 

JUDAISM  OF  HISTORY.— PART  II. 

Rabbinical  Judaism  is  that  religious  system  which,  on  the  basis  of  the 
material  developed  during  the  Second  Commonwealth  of  the  Hebrews,  was 
built  up  by  the  various  rabbis  between  the  first  and  tenth  Christian  cen- 
turies, called  Tanaim  to  the  end  of  the  second  century,  Amora'im  to  the 
end  of  the  fifth  century,  Sabura'im  in  the  sixth  century  and  GuJonim,  to  the 
end  of  the  tenth  century. 

With  all  the  piety,  patriotism,  learning,  sagacity  and  profound  morality 
of  those  various  patristic  teacher?,  they  made  notably  two  mistakes.  (1) 
They  considered  every  law  of  Moses  eternally  obligatory  upon  every  Is- 
raelite ;  but  most  of  those  laws  not  being  applicable  under  the  emergencies 
of  various  ages,  they  were  explained  in  a  manner  to  meet  those  emer- 
gencies. Those  decisions  again  being  law,  further  decisions  were  again 
based  upon  those  secondary  laws,  so  that  the  body  of  laws  became  enor- 
mous, and  in  many  instances  obscured  the  laws  of  Moses,  from  which  it 
was  supposed  to  be  derived.  (2)  They  were  too  scrupulous  with  the  in- 
herited customs,  disciplines  and  laws,  so  that  every  possible  detail  and 
doubt  in  the  written  and  oral  law  was  anxiously  investigated,  discussed 
and  fixed,  which  enormously  increased  the  body  of  rabbinical  law.  It 
took  a  man  a  lifetime  to  learn  the  whole  law  and  carry  it  into  practice. 

The  cause  of  all  this  was,  in  the  first  place,  their  scrupulously  conscien- 
tious desire  to  live  exactly  according  to  the  laws  of  Moses  and  the  rabbis ;  and 
in  the  second  place,  their  reserved  right,  wherever  they  lived,  to  be  gov- 
erned by  their  own  laws,  in  the  Roman  Empire  as  well  as  in  Persia,  Spain^ 
France,  Germany  and  elsewhere.  This  exercised  an  excellent  influence 
upon  the  Jewish  mind,  which  was  trained  by  the  study  of  the  Law,  while 
others  studied  and  learned  nothing  besides  legends  and  hob-goblin  stories, 
and  made  them  conscientious,  while  knights  and  princes  attended  to  their 
feuds,  fights,  chases  and  the  whipping  of  dogs,  horses  and  peasants.  The  laws 
of  the  rabbis  protected  the  Israelite  against  the  corruption  of  lawlessness 
which  was  then  the  general  law,  the  feudal  and  decretal  laws  of  the  rulers 
of  nations.  The  Talmud  cultivated  the  Jew,  when  all  other  elements  of 
culture  were  confined  to  a  few  fraters  in  some  convents,  and  a  few  scholasts 
carefully  hiding  their  opinions  behind  the  barriers  of  bad  Latin. 


—  112  — 

Upon  Judaism  itself,  as  a  religion,  it  had  the  evil  effect  that  it  distracted 
the  attention  of  rabbis  and  laymen  from  the  spirit  and  essence  of  religion 
and  ethics,  and  captivated  it  in  the  mass  of  forms,  observances  and  laws, 
which  imposed  upon  it  the  outward  appearance  of  "  no  religion."  The 
Jew  was  a  firm  believer,  a  sound  thinker  in  the  Law,  but  he  was  no  reasoner, 
he  had  no  philosophy  of  religion.  This  was  certainly  injurious  to  his  in- 
telligence. 

The  combat  against  this  evil  was  opened  by  the  Gaon  Saadia  of  Fiuma, 
in  Egypt,  and  was  continued  by  the  Jewish  philosophers  of  the  Spanish 
school  in  Spain  and  Southern  France,  in  Northern  Africa  and  Western 
Asia,  by  prominent  reasoners  and  scientists,  especially  physicians  and  as- 
tronomers who  were  well  versed  also  in  rabbinical  lore,  down  to  the  expul- 
sion of  the  Jews  from  Spain  in  the  year  1492.  The  principal  teachers  and 
authors  were  Solomon  Ibn  Gabirol,  who  was  the  Vicebron  of  the  Christian 
students ;  Bachia  Ibn  Pakudah,  the  moral  philosopher ;  Abraham  Ibn 
Daud,  Judah  Halevi,  Abraham  and  Moses  Ibn  Ezra,  Ibn  Zadik,  and  the 
Ibn  Thibbon  family,  all  of  whom  were  the  forerunners  of  Moses  Maimon- 
ides,  who  gave  to  the  Jews  not  only  his  complete  rabbinical  code,  Mishnah 
Thorah,  and  a  large  number  of  rabbinical  commentaries,  philosophical  and 
medical  writings,  but  also  the  first  complete  philosophy  of  religion  in  the 
three  volumes  of  his  Moreh  Nebuchim,  from  which  Jews,  Christians  and 
Mohammedans  have  adopted  much  for  the  advancement  of  rational  religion. 
He  was  the  great  harmonizer  of  reason  an<5  faith.  His  successors  were  Ger- 
sonides,  Creskas  (opponent),  Joseph  Albo,  Shem  Tob  Palquira,  Isaac 
Arama,  Samuel  Sarsa,  Isaac  Abarbanel,  and  a  host  of  others  who  made  the 
philosophy  of  Judaism  their  particular  study,  and  spread  it  b}T  Hebrew 
translations  (most  of  them  wrote  in  Arabic)  far  and  wide  among  the  Jews 
of  the  civilized  world,  and  by  Latin  translations  among  Christian  students, 
although  that  Harvard  College  professor  who  lately  wrote  a  text-book  on 
Judaism  knows  nothing  about  it.  Those  philosophers  wrote  also  crit 
ical  commentaries  on  the  Bible,  especially  Abraham  Ibn  Ezra,  Levi  Ger- 
sonides  and  Isaac  Abarbanel,  commentaries  which,  in  many  instances, 
revolutionized  the  old  conceptions  of  the  Bible,  opened  a  new  path  to  rea- 
soners, and  are  still  indispensable  to  Bible  critics. 

The  new  spirit  cultivated  by  those  philosophers  and  their  cotemporaries 
gave  rise  to  three  phases  of  Judaism.  1.  The  historical  or  rabbinical  Ju- 
daism which  found  its  literature  in  the  casuists  and  expounders  of  the  Tal- 
mud mostly  among  the  Spanish  scholars  and  authors,  like  Alfasi  and  hi.s 
disciples,  Maimonides  and  his  disciples,  Nachmanides,  Rabbi  Asher  (Ger- 
man) and  his  sons,  Adereth  and  others,  and  the  Franco-Germanic  school  of 
Rabbi  Solomon  ben  Isaac  or  Rashi,  who  expounded  and  codified  system- 


—  113  — 

atically  the  rabbinical  material.  It  was  again  a  new  form  of  Judaism 
which  they  sought  to  establish  and  crystalize  it  forever.  But  they  could  not 
stop  the  law  of  evolution,  and  so  there  came  behind  them  another  corps  of 
expounders  and  codifiers  whose  labors  culminated  in  the  sixteenth  cen- 
tury in  the  Palestinean  Joseph  Oaro,  in  the  Polish  Moses  Isserls,  who  were 
again  succeeded  by  others,  perhaps  of  no  less  importance  to  Rabbinical  Ju- 
daism, up  to  the  very  noonday  of  the  nineteenth  century.  In  the  form  of 
worship  they  went  apart  in  the  principal  rituals  with  different  shadings  in 
each,  viz  :  the  Portuguese  or  Sephardic,  the  Germanic  or  Minhag  Ashkenaz, 
and  the  Polish  or  Minhag  Polen. 

2.  The  Kabbalistic  Judaism  now  called  th£  Chassidism.     Mysticism  always 
follows  in  the  wake  of  rationalism.     The  philosopher  endeavors  to  explain 
everything,  God,  world,  man,  their  relations,  eternity  and  its  mysteries,  in 
which  he  can  not  possibly  succeed  to  the  satisfaction  of  all  men.     He  ex- 
hausts himself  and  finally  arrives  at  an  inexplicable  residue,  which  gives  rise 
to  mysticism  in  the  unsatisfied  minds.     This  is  a  law  of  history,  and  was 
also  the  case  in  Spain.     Philosophy  produced  among  its  opponents  that 
mysticism  in  religion  and  expounding  of  the  Bible  which  is  called  the  Kabba- 
lah, and  has  its  main  literature  in  the  Zohar,  an  extensive  commentary  to 
the  five  books  of  Moses,  written  in  Spain,  published  and  studied  most  ex- 
tensively by  Christians  of  the  sixteenth  century  in  Italy  and  Germany.     This 
remarkable  compendium  of  mysticism  and  poetry,  truth  and  fiction,  gave 
rise  to  a  new  literature  among  Jews  and  Christians,  which  at  last  culminated 
in  the  practical  Kabbalah,  especially  in  the  Orient,  in  Russia  and  Poland, 
among  pretending  Messiahs,  and  among  the  so-called  Chassidim,  who  are 
most-  numerous  now  in  Russia,  Galicia  and  Hungary.     Their  rabbis  still 
converse  with  the  angels,  banish  evil  spirits,  cure  diseases  by  amulets  and 
magic  spells,  are  saints  and  workers  of  miracles.     They  are  rabbinical  Jews 
to  a  certain  extent  only.     The  Zohar  is  their  holy  book,  and  the  rabbi  their 
highest  authority.     Wherever  this  authority  and  that  book  collides  with  the 
Talmud  and  its  casuists,  or  even  with  the  laws  of  Moses,  they  follow  their 
own  established  authority.     Their  ritual  and  form  of  worship  are  peculiar 
to  themselves.     In  this  point  the  Palestinean  Rabbi,  Isaac  Luria,  is  their 
principal  authority.     Notwithstanding  the  fierce  opposition  of  the  orthodox 
rabbis  to  Kabbalism,  many  of  the  opinions,  views,  prayer-,  formulas  and  ob- 
servances of  the  Kabbalists  found  their  way  into  the  later  rabbinical  litera- 
ture, the  orthodox  liturgy  and  ritual,  and  became  to  the  opposite  side  one 
of  the  main  causes  of  reforms  in  the  synagogue. 

3.  The  philosophical  or  rational  Judaism,  whose  main  literature  was  also 
the  Bible  and  the  Talmud,  differently  expounded,  however.     The  traditional 

15 


_  114  _ 

methods  and  forms  were  not  considered  the  highest  authority,  from  which 
there  was  no  appeal  to  reason  or  science;  free  research  and  free  thought 
took  the  places  of  traditional  beliefs  and  rabbinical  laws,  Talmudical  or 
post-Talmudical.  The  same  relations  of  Judaism  to  the  Talmud  as  the  rela- 
tion? of  Protestants  to  the  Fathers  and  traditions  of  the  Church  were  gradu- 
ally established.  The  Jewish  beliefs  and  doctrines,  as  expounded  in  that 
Spanish  school,  were  placed  conspicuously  in  front,  the  observances  and  rab- 
binical laws  were  placed  in  the  background  ;  reason,  science  and  the  progress 
of  ages  were  allowed  a  large  share  in  forming  the  religious  opinion.  The 
school  of  reasoners  from  Saadia  down  to  Abarbanel  became,  by  common  con- 
sent, the  authority. 

The  Jews  driven  from  Spain,  persecuted  in  Germany,  and  oppressed 
everywhere  else,  except  in  Holland  and  Belgium,  driven  in  large  numbers  to 
the  Orient,  into  Russia  and  Poland,  outside  of  the  progressive  culture  of 
Western  Europe,  fell  back  into  an  unreasoning  orthodoxy,  as  oppressed  and 
persecuted  people  always  do,  and  built  up  that  rabbinism  and  kabbalism, 
under  which  the  masses  are  still  held  spellbound,  as  are  the  Mohammedans, 
Greek  and  Roman  Catholics  of  the  same  regions.  Overawed  and  terrified  by 
priests,  princes  and  mobs,  deprived  of  the  freedom  of  speech,  pressed  into 
narrow  ghettoes,  ridiculed  by  petulant  writers  and  travestied  by  comedians, 
the  Jew  was  silent,  dumfounded,  and  would  not  utter  a  rational  idea,  fearing 
it  might  be  offensive  to  the  Church  or  the  State.  Not  entirely,  however,  were  the 
Jews  silent.  Even  in  Poland,  where  Rabbi  Lip~nann  had  written  his  Nizza- 
chon,  a  rational  commentary  on  the  Bible,  against  the  accepted  Christian  and 
Jewish  exegesis,  in  grateful  recognition  of  which  he  was  burnt  alive  by  the 
holy  men  of  the  Church;  even  in  Poland  Isaac  Troki  wrote  his  Chizzak 
Emunah  in  the  same  spirit  as  the  Nizzachon,  and  Rabbi  Lipman  Heller 
stood  at  the  head  of  the  Polish  rabbis,  although  his  commentaries  to  the  Mish  - 
nah  were  more  scientific  than  orthodox.  Germany  produced  quite  a  num- 
ber of  reasoners  and  scientists.  Spinoza  wrote  in  Holland,  and  the  Jewish 
culture  culminated  in  Italy,  where  the  disciples  of  Maimonides  and  Abraham 
Ibn  Ezra  were  quite  numerous,  and  figured  as  professors  of  universities, 
teachers  of  cardinals  and  princes,  and  physicians  of  popes  as  well  as  of  sul- 
tans and  emperors.  The  number  of  enlightened  and  progressive  men  like 
Sepurno,  Elias  Levita,  Azariah  dei  Rossi,  Leon  di  Modena,  the  Del  Medigos, 
the  historiographer  Gans,  and  the  reformatory,  though  anti-philosophical, 
Rabbi  Jacob  Emden,  was  not  very  small.  The  masses  of  the  Hebrew  peo- 
ple, living  under  continuous  oppression  and  constant  fear  of  the  Church  au- 
thorities, remained  orthodox,  silent  and  exclusive.  The  humane  and  en- 
lightened eighteenth  century  encouraged  also  the  Jew  and  brought  him 
out  of  his  dark  retreats.  The  zephyr  of  spring  moved  the  minds  in  the 


—  115  — 

ghettoes,  and  men  of  distinction,  of  mind  and  learning  ventured  out  into 
broad  daylight.  Moses  Mendelssohn  was  the  representative  man  of  the 
age.  That  timid  philosopher,  the  author  of  Phasdan  and  Morgenstunden, 
the  translator  of  the  Pentateuch,  Psalms  and  Ecclesiastes  and  commentator 
of  several  books  of  the  Bible,  became  a  conductor  of  modern  culture  to  his 
people  and  a  representative  expounder  of  Judaism  to  his  many  Christian 
friends  and  opponents.  New  forms  and  methods  were  developed  among 
the  Jews,  in  Germany  especially.  The  spirit  of  the  Spanish  school  resur- 
rected in  Germany.  The  French  Revolution,  the  succeeding  wars,  then  the 
reaction  and  the  new  despotism  in  Germany  and  Austria  kept  that  spirit  at 
bay  and  smothered  every  reformatory  movement.  Then  came  the  struggle 
for  emancipation  and  captivated  the  minds ;  it  retarded,  but  it  could  not 
stop  the  law  of  evolution,  which  went  on  under  the  surface.  It  culminated 
first  in  a  new  Jewish  literature  of  history,  criticism,  theology  and  its 
branches ;  and  then  in  a  spirit  of  reformation,  which  found  its  expression 
in  a  number  of  rabbinical  conferences,  in  which  the  Spanish  school,  in  con- 
nection with  German  learning  and  culture,  declared  its  triumphs  over  the 
rabbinical  and  Kabbalistic  orthodoxy. 

So  the  newest  phase  of  Judaism  was  begotten.  It  re-echoes  in  Italy, 
France  and  England.  It  celebrates  its  triumphs  in  Hungary,  Poland  and 
Russia.  It  was  carried  into  the  United  States  of  America,  where  in  the 
short  period  of  one  generation  it  was  transformed  into  American  Judaism. 
Nowhere  in  all  Europe  could  that  reformatory  spirit  manifest  itself  in  its 
full  vigor.  Old  and  stereotyped  forms  and  institutions,  the  orthodoxy  of 
princes  and  priests,  together  with  the  intolerance  of  nations  and  the  fanati- 
cism of  the  masses,  were  and  are  now  indestructible  barriers,  insurmount- 
able obstacles.  Emancipation  and  then  the  preservation  of  the  recaptured 
rights  of  man,  together  with  the  domineering  materialism,  atheism  and 
hatred  against  religion  which  characterized  almost  all  European  Democrats, 
turned  ever  so  many  excellent  minds  from  Judaism  and  checked  the  re- 
formatory spirit.  In  this  country,  however,  where  the  forms  and  institu- 
tions of  Judaism  had  to  be  newly  established,  perfect  freedom  reigned  in 
the  government  and  people,  and  the  number  of  sects  is  so  large  that  the 
mutual  prejudices  could  be  but  very  mild;  here  in  this  blessed  country 
that  reformatory  spirit  which,  for  centuries,  had  been  the  undercurrent  of 
the  apparently  defunct  and  benumbed  forms  of  Judaism,  triumphed  in  prac- 
tical institutions,  new  forms  and  methods,  as  it  did  nowhere  in  the  world ; 
and  from  here  it  reacts  on  Europe  as  do  our  political  institutions.  Amer- 
ican Judaism  is,  in  forms  and  methods,  far  ahead  of  the  Jewish  congrega- 
tions in  any  and  every  other  country,  Germany  not  excepted.  Practically 
the  spirit  of  the  Spanish  school  resurrects  in  the  American  Judaism,  with 


its  love  of  freedom,  its  spirit  of  charity  and  benevolence,  humanism  and 
fraternization,  its  patriotic  principles  and  national  attachment,  its  Minhag 
America  and  its  American  spirit  of  progress  and  unification.  Let  those 
Spanish  Hidalgoes  of  the  Jewish  mind  rise  and  see  how  they  live  anew  in 
American  Judaism. 

And  yet  what  is  the  fundamental  principle  of  all  those  changes  in  form 
and  method?  It  is  in  the  first  place  the  Sinaic  revelation,  the  covenant  of 
God  and  Israel,  with  its  eternal  doctrines  and  laws,  precepts  and  ordi- 
nances, which  man  has  not  made  and  man  can  not  change.  Under  all  the 
revolutions  and  changes  of  thirty-four  centuries  of  history,  this  basis  was 
not  changed,  not  touched  even ;  this  standpoint  was  not  affected  by  the 
law  of  evolution.  It  was,  is,  and  will  remain  forever  the  immovable  cor- 
ner-stone of  Israel's  and  mankind's  positive  religion.  Necessity,  the  pressure 
of  events,  reduced  it  to  Palestinean  religion,  Babylonian  and  Egyptian  re- 
ligion, Roman  and  German  or  Spanish  religion,  tribal  religion,  ghetto  re- 
ligion, rabbinical  or  Kabbalistic.  But  all  these  changed  forms  and  methods 
are  the  offspring  of  evolution  and  outer  circumstances,  the  children  of  time 
fluctuating  arid  transitory,  and  the  fundamental  principle  of  the  Sinaic 
revelation  and  the  covenant  remain  unchanged  forever. 

And  in  the  second  place  it  is  the  principle  of  reform,  progress,  change  of 
forms  and  methods  which  underlies  the  whole  process  of  Jewish  history. 
The  mobility  of  stability  is  its  chief  characteristic.  The  immovable  center 
is  the  Sinaic  revelation  and  the  covenant.  All  from  center  to  surface  is 
subject  to  perpetual  metamorphosis.  The  sound  and  vigorous  center  im- 
parts perpetual  life  and  movement  to  all  parts  of  that  sphere,  and  compels 
the  perpetual  changes  of  form  and  method,  in  order  to  remain  in  corre- 
spondence with  the  surroundings  of  the  outer  world. 

Proceed,  go  on,  always  onward  and  forward,  benign  spirit  of  progress  and 
advancement,  with  reason's  aid,  the  advice  of  goodness,  and  with  Heaven's 
voice  :  "  I,  Jehovah,  am  thy  Elohim."  Go  on  and  unite  all  good  men  in 
peace  and  harmony,  for  the  blessing  and  happiness  of  man,  and  to  the 
glory  of  God  and  His  eternal  word. 


XVIII. 
THE  CHRISTIANITY  OF  HISTORY. 

It  is  not  right,  perhaps,  that  I  write  a  lecture  on  the  Christianity  of  his- 
tory, as  I  do  not  comprehend  and  understand  Christianity  as  a  Christian 
would ;  and  I  know,  on  the  other  hand,  that  Christians  like  Hitzig, 
Kuenen,  Wellhausen,  or  also  Millraan  and  that  learned  professor  of  Harvard 
College,  writing  on  the  Judaism  of  history,  make  very  considerable  mis- 
takes, partly  by  their  ignorance  of  the  Jewish  literature  and  partly  by  the 
misunderstanding  of  the  spirit  and  essence  of  that  literature  and  the  people 
that  produced  it.  I  will,  therefore,  be  brief  and  cautious  in  my  remarks  on 
this  important  subject. 

It  is  admitted  on  all  sides  that  Christianity  in  its  primitive  and  original 
form  was  a  Jewish  sect,  and  so  remained  for  a  very  long  time  in  the  Orient, 
so  that  the  Romans  for  many  years  knew  no  difference  between  Jew  and 
Christian,  although  Paul,  the  Apostle  to  the  Gentiles,  declared  the  Law  ab- 
rogated. If  this  i.*  so,  it  must  also  be  true  that  primitive  Christianity  no 
less  than  Judaism  based  itself  upon  the  Sinaic  revelation  and  adhered  also 
to  the  laws  of  Moses,  which  were  read  in  the  churches  as  well  as  the  syna- 
gogues, until  the  Emperor  Hadrian  prohibited  this  ancient  practice.  Then 
the  Gospel  according  to  Mark  was  written  to  be  read  among  the  Nazarenes 
of  Jerusalem  instead  of  the  Law  and  the  Prophets.  But  long  after  that  the 
Oriental  Christians  lived  according  to  the  laws  of  Moses,  until  at  last  they 
were  excommunicated  by  the  Gentile  Christians.  Paul's  protestations  against 
the  law  and  circumcision  were  in  nowise  directed  against  the  Sinaic  revela- 
tion and  covenant,  although  he  goes  back  to  the  Abrahamitic  covenant ;  for 
he  preached  the  same  moral  doctrine  and  the  same  God,  who  should  be  again 
"  all  in  all,"  when  the  Son  will  return  the  kingdom  to  the  Father.  He  held 
so  firmly  to  the  laws  of  the  Decalogue  that  he  commanded  the  adulterer 
among  his  flock  to  be  put  to  death;  and  claimed  that  the  covenant  had 
been  inherited  by  the  Gentiles.  The  'abolition  of  the  law  referred  to  the 
political,  civil,  criminal,  ceremonial  or  Levitical  laws,  all  that  concerned  the 
State,  the  temple,  the  altar,  the  sacrifices,  the  priesthood  ;  not  to  the  moral 
law  and  the  religious  doctrine.  Thi^,  I  believe,  is  admitted  by  the  orthodox 
expounders  of  the  New  Testament.  Hence  it  must  also  be  admitted  that  the 
Sinaic  revelation  and  the  covenant  were  the  fundamental  principle  of  prim- 


—  118  — 

itive  and  original  Christianity,  and  the  protestations  of  its  founders  were 
directed  only  against  a  portion  of  the  laws  and  institutions  of  Moses  and  what 
was  based  upon  them  by  Sanhedrin,  scribes  and  popular  customs,  observ- 
ances and  opinions.  Therefore  reformation  in  Christendom  actually  signi- 
fies returning  to  the  standpoint  and  basis  of  the  Sinaic  revelation  and  the 
covenant  for  the  entire  human  family. 

The  abrogation  of  those  laws  was  necessary  for  the  promulgation  of  Chris- 
tianity. The  political  laws  of  the  Jews  with  their  theocratic  and  democratic 
foundation,  especially  after  the  fall  of  Jerusalem,  were  an  abomination  to  the 
Romans  and  Greeks.  The  sacrificial  polity  was  not  only  impracticable  out- 
side of  Palestine,  but  it  had  been  outlived,  as  is  evident  from  Jewish  written 
sources.  The  Hebrews  themselves  had  already  established  a  new  form  of 
worship  in  the  numerous  cities  in  Palestine,  Egypt,  Persia  and  elsewhere. 
Christianity,  in  order  to  succeed  among  the  Gentiles,  had  to  appear  among 
them  without  those  laws  and  circumcision,  only  with  the  Sinaic  revelation 
and  the  covenant  as  understood  and  expounded  by  the  Prophets,  and  as  ac- 
cepted by  those  "devout  Gentiles"  of  whom  Paul  speaks  so  often.* 

Christianity,  starting  out  without  laws,  made  its  Talmud  entirely  differ- 
ent from  that  of  the  Jews,  although  it  was  developed  by  the  same  law  of  evo- 
lution as  Judaism  was.  It  made,  in  course  of  time,  a  Talmud  of  Rome,  a 
Talmud  of  Constantinople,  and  at  last  a  Talmud  of  Protestanism.  With  the 
laws  of  Moses,  also  the  freedom,  equality  and  stern  justice  underlying  them 
were  relinquished,  abandoned  to  the  so-called  wordly  rulers,  which  was  a 
great  loss  to  humanity.  The  Church  had  nothing  to  do  with  the  laws.  It 
dealt  in  doctrines  which  were  crystallized  into  dogmas  and  creeds,  in  dis- 
ciplines which  were  fixed  and  enforced,  and  in  church  property  which  was 
accumulated  and  governed.  Although  the  patristic  writers  of  the  Church, 
whether  dogmatic,  homiletic,  exegetic,  legendary  or  epistolary,  strictly  ad- 
hered to  the  rabbinical  method,  the  Derashah,  which  means  expounding 
Scriptures  without  established  rules  of  interpretation,  to  advance  doctrines 
and  precepts  deemed  necessary  or  requisite  for  the  instruction  or  edification 
of  the  masses ;  they  did  not  discuss  law  or  Halachah  as  the  rabbis  did ; 
hence  the  Christian  Talmud  became  dogmatic  and  purely  speculative,  under 
the  guidance  of  Greco-Alexandrian  or  Greco-Roman  methods  with  some, 
and  without  any  logic  or  system  with  others. 

The  difficulties  which  they  had  to  overcome  were  numerous.  They  had 
inherited  the  Jewish  and  the  Gentile  Christianity,  with  the  law  and  without 
it,  with  Jewish  opinions  and  Pagan  fragments ;  the  Jewish  Messiah  and 


*For  a  more  extensive  exposition  of  these  points  see  the  author's  "  Lectures  on  the 
Origin  of  Christianity." 


-   119  — 

second  advent  belief  of  the  original  Apostles,  the  Metathronic  Son  of  God, 
the  end  of  the  world,  and  the  last  judgment  day  at  hand,  in  the  teachings 
of  Paul,  the  Logos  mystery  and  of  the  Alexandrian  school  in  the  Gospel  ac- 
cording to  John,  the  Holy  Ghost  theories  of  Jewish  mystics,  and  the  plu- 
rality of  deities  in  the  Heathen  consciousness ;  the  different  natures  and 
offices  of  their  Messiah  and  the  various  accounts  of  his  conception,  birth, 
genealogy,  life,  death,  resurrection  and  ascension.  All  these  difficulties 
and  contradictions  they  were  called  upon  to  overcome,  harmonize  and  crys- 
tallize into  a  dogmatic  Christology,  which  certainly  was  no  small  piece  of 
work  and  no  common  incentive  to  the  mind  for  the  exercise  of  ingenuity  and 
reasoning  powers,  in  dealing  with  abstract  questions,  and  reducing  a  chain 
of  thoughts  into  the  stereotyped  words  of  a  dogma 

This  form  of  mental  labor  was  certainly  beneficial.  It  made  the  Christian 
teachers  idealistic,  while  the  Jewish  rabbis  remained  realistic  up  to  the 
days  of  the  Spanish  school.  Its  nugatory  influence  was,  that  it  absorbed 
the  mind  by  one  field  of  human  speculation  to  the  detriment  of  all  others. 
Practical  life  with  all  its  important  questions  were  excluded  from  the  stu- 
dent's sphere.  He  was  a  theologian,  and  naturally  attempted  to  make  all 
persons  and  things  theological  or  useless.  The  mind  concentrated  on  dog- 
matic speculations,  became  one-sided,  intolerant  and  fanatical,  which 
caused  the  endless  feuds  and  quarrels  in  the  Church;  the  persecu- 
tion, oppression  and  frequent  slaughter  of  so-called  heretics,  schismatics 
and  infidels ;  and  the  relentless  combats  of  priests,  princes  and  nations  on 
account  of  dogmas,  which  one  believed  and  the  other  denied.  The  large 
masses  of  people  unable  to  reason  with  the  dogmatists,  understood  nothing 
of  the  theological  questions,  remained  ignorant  and  helpless  tools  in  the 
hands  of  the  priests,  who  succeeded  easily  in  making  them  believe  any- 
thing they  pleased.  The  people  remained  as  ignorant  of  the  affairs  of 
the  Church  as  they  did  of  the  affairs  of  the  State.  They  were  governed 
soul  and  body.  The  reasoners,  too,  were  gradually  reduced  to  a  method  of 
reasoning  from  imaginary  premises  without  any  reference  to  facts,  phe- 
nomena and  realities,  so  that  they  became  mere  advocates  of  the  domineering 
system  without  the  energy  to  rise  above  it  and  survey  it  from  another 
standpoint. 

To  this  mental  and  spiritual  state  of  affairs  another  factor  must  be  added  ; 
this  was  the  constantly  growing  wealth  and  power  of  the  Church,  its  serv- 
ants and  devotees.  This  naturally  gave  rise  to  Church  legislation  by  po- 
tentates on  the  one  hand,  by  Pope  and  Council,  or  also  by  inferior  prelates 
on  the  other,  to  establish  and  protect  the  Church,  the  orthodox  dogmas  and 
fixed  disciplines,  the  priesthood  and  the  domains  of  the  Church;  a  legisla- 
tion which  grew  into  the  Canon  Law,  by  which  Christendom  has  been  gov- 


—  120  — 

erned  and  is  governed  to-day,  with  or  without  the  consent  of  the  nations  or 
the  individuals  thereof.  This  ecclesiastical  power  and  dominion  had  cer- 
tainly its  beneficial  influence.  The  Canon  Law  was  by  far  better  than  none, 
and  there  was  none  among  the  domineering  ruffians  of  knights  and  chivalric 
princes  who  despised  knowledge  as  they  did  labor  and  the  laborer,  and  rec- 
ognized only  the  right  of  might.  The  ecclesiastical  power  counterpoised 
the  lawless  power  of  despots  for  the  benefit  of  the  governed  masses.  It  gave 
to  students  a  material  aside  from  the  dogmatic  quibbling  in  which  they  were 
ingulfed.  Notwithstanding  the  horrible  wrongs  sanctioned  or  instigated 
by  Church  legislation,  the  burning  of  infidels,  witches  and  lunatics;  the 
persecution  and  oppression  of  Jews  and  Turks ;  the  absolution  for  rich 
sinners  and  the  slavery  imposed  upon  the  helpless  multitude;  notwith- 
standing all  that  and  much  more,  the  Canon  law  was  a  holy  thing,  a  piece 
of  divinity  in  the  minds  of  the  masses,  the  reasoner  and  the  thoughtless, 
priest  or  layman,  exactly  as  the  Talmud  was  to  the  Jew  and  the  tradition 
to  the  Mohammedan.* 

This  is  the'  organism  which  the  law  of  evolution  brought  forth  in  the 
Church.  This  is  the  variety  of  forms  and  methods  which  rose  and  disap- 
peared or  remained  in  Christendom.  This  is  the  material  of  which  the 
Talmud  of  Rome  and  the  Talmud  of  Constantinople  and  St.  Petersburg 
are  composed,  with  all  the  wisdom  and  follies,  truth  and  fiction,  kindness 
and  cruelty,  justice  and  bloody  wrongs,  which  they  contain;  all  to  estab- 
lish a  Christology  which  they  might  be  pleased  to  call  orthodox,  a  church 
and  priesthood  to  protect  and  promulgate  that  very  Christology,  a  form  of 
worship  with  a  form  of  domination.  It  was  a  colossal  aparatus  to  lift  a 
•fly,  a  furious  Vesuvius  to  roast  an  egg,  much  ado  about  nothing.  The 
whole  noise  was  about  the  different  reports  concerning  Jews  which  had 
reached  the  patristic  writers,  the  clashing  contradictions  which  that  pro- 
duced, and  the  quarrels  of  priests  over  it.  The  starting  point,  primitive 
and  original  Christianity  according  to  either  Peter,  Paul  or  John,  was  lost 
sight  of;  the  Sinaic  revelation  and  the  covenant  were  almost  forgotten,  and 
the  whole  affair  was  forced  upon  another  field,  the  field  of  Christology 
"  which  thy  fathers  knew  not."  The  revealed  matter,  that  which  is  ac- 
knowledged on  all  sides  as  revealed  matter,  was  laid  aside ;  and  the  specula- 


*In  Austria  and  Germany  the  Talmud  has  lately  been  attacked  quite  severely  by 
Christian  professors,  and  defended  by  the  rabbis.  But  none  of  them  has  had  the 
moral  courage  to  advance  that  there  is  certainly  no  absurdity  in  the  Talmud  which 
is  not  duplicated  in  the  dogmatic  discussions,  and  no  injustice  which  is  not  outdone 
by  some  canon  law  of  the  Church,  or  some  decree  of  a  Council.  And  yet  such  is 
the  recorded  fact. 


—  121  — 

tion  and  legislation  of  priests  was  taken  up  in  its  stead.    The  servant  occu- 
pies the  master's  chair. 

And  now  comes  Protestanism.  Huss  protested.  Luther,  Melanchthon, 
Calvin  and  Zwingly  protested.  Erasmus,  of  Amsterdam,  Vander  Houghton, 
Henry  VIIE..  of  England,  and  Gustavus  Adolphus.  of  Sweden,  protested, 
and  they  found  numerous  followers  who  declared  that  the  old  form  of 
Christianity  had  been  broken,  the  scholastic  methods  had  outlived  their 
days  of  usefulness.  The  men  of  the  fifteenth  and  sixteenth  centuries  began  a 
new  chapter  of  history  by  the  invention  of  typography,  the  revival  of  let- 
ters, the  establishment  of  commerce,  the  remodeling  of  state  governments, 
the  cultivation  of  philosophy,  the  study  of  the  classical  remains  of  an- 
tiquity. The  minds  were  no  longer  ingulfed  in  dogmatic  theology  exclu- 
sively ;  it  was  no  longer  all-important.  Other  themes  engaged  the  minds, 
and  a  spirit  of  freedom  appeared  on  the  horizon  of  man  which  penetrated 
into  the  churches  and  convents,  rousing  some  monks,  priests  and  scholi- 
asts to  recognize  and  do  justice  to  that  new  spirit  which  traveled  through 
the  nations  of  Western  Europe.  It  is  hard  to  decide  whether  those  reformers 
or  their  cotemporaries  were  unfit  for  a  thorough  reformation ;  but  it  is  cer- 
tain that  while  they  reformed  disciplines  and  pretended  to  reject  the  whole 
Talmud  of  Rome  with  all  its  traditions,  dogmatism  and  canon  law,  they 
advanced  the  old  orthodoxy  in  a  new  form  without  any  attempt  to  come 
back  to  primitive  and  original  Christianity.  They  not  only  retained  the 
whole  burden  of  Christology  as  established  by  Popes  and  Councils,  but 
made  it  so  much  more  oppressive  to  the  mind,  by  denying  the  right  of 
reason  and  negativing  the  existence  of  free  will  altogether,  making  of  the 
Bible  a  new  and  infallible  Pope,  and  of  their  Christology  the  indispensable 
chariot  in  which  to  ride  into  Heaven.  A  new  Talmud  was  gradually 
evolved  from  the  defunct  remains  of  the  old,  the  Talmud  of  Protestantism. 
Those  good  men  then  certainly  believed  they  had  fixed  and  secured  forever 
their  special  form  and  method  of  religion,  never  to  be  disturbed  again. 
They  forgot  the  law  of  evolution.  They  forgot  that  they  disturbed  one 
system,  and  whatever  disturbs  can  be  disturbed. 

In  spite  of  Christian  theology  and  churchcraft  the  European  nations  ad- 
vanced from  the  darkness  of  the  Middle  Ages  to  the  morning  dawn  of  the 
sixteenth  century.  '  So  also,  in  spite  of  all  the  blunders  made  in  the  Ref- 
ormation, the  European  nations  advanced  from  the  dawn  in  the  sixteenth 
century  to  the  high  noon  of  the  nineteenth.  Pressed  onward  by  the 
spread  of  .science,  commerce,  industry  and  enlightenment  to  the  revolu- 
tions of  the  eighteenth  century  in  all  provinces  of  human  activity,  Chris- 
tianity against  its  will  was  also  revolutionized.  The  old  Christology  of 
supposed  facts  was  changed  into  a  speculative  Christology,  by  men  like 


—  122  — 

Frederick  Schleiermacher,  Kant,  Schelling,  Hegel,  the  English  theists,  the 
Saxon  Unitarians  of  Transylvania,  and  a  host  of  other  men  and  societies, 
who  wanted  to  be  Christians  by  name  at  least.  For  that  speculative  or 
rational  Christology  means  a  negation  of  supposed  facts,  in  place  of  which 
the  idea  is  set.  They  do  not  maintain  apodictically  that  the  alleged  facts 
are  not  true;  they  only  consider  them  indifferent  and  superfluous.  The 
ideas  which  they  represent  are  sufficient  to  constitute  a  satisfactory  Christ- 
ology ;  anyhow  they  are  amply  sufficient  to  show  why  the  Christian 
world  always  believed  those  allegations  to  be  historical  facts  and  to  confer 
upon  their  churches,  sects  or  societies  the  title  of  Christian.  This  is  the 
last  phase  of  Christian  reformation ;  the  next  step  beyond  leads  into  the 
Sinaic  revelation  and  the  covenant  as  the  sole  foundation  of  positive  relig- 
ion. 

Those  men,  Schelling  and  Hegel  included,  make  one  great  mistake, 
which  has  the  effect  of  keeping  many  in  a  vicious  circle,  of  the  same  na- 
ture precisely  as  that  of  the  orthodox  dogmatics,  when  they  proved 
their  dogmas  by  some  accidental  statement  in  the  New  Testament  or  also 
in  the  Old  as  understood  by  some  prior  dogmatists.  Those  modern  doc- 
tors who  care  not  about  facts,  tell  us  the  New  Testament  Scriptures 
were  a  mere  and  imperfect  beginning  of  Christianity,  giving  the  impulse 
to  a  new  development,  in  which  each  succeeding  stage  is  superior  to  the 
preceding  one,  so  that  the  modern  Unitarian  stands  upon  the  top  of  the 
ladder.  Christianity  in  its  historical  development  and  progress  of  Christian 
thought,  has  left  its  sects  from  every  phase  of  development  as  a  sort  of 
documentary  history,  which  proves  beyond  a  doubt  that  each  succeeding 
sect  is  more  enlightened  than  the  preceding. 

It  is  not  very  likely  that  those  very  sects  will  admit  this  allegation.  But 
suppose  this  be  admitted,  it  merely  proves  that  Christian  thinkers  were  and 
are  now  engaged  in  undoing  what  their  predecessors  have  built  up.  It 
is  a  process  of  self-destruction,  or,  at  least,  of  destroying  all  Christology. 
Those  modern  gentlemen  actually  maintain  that  Christology  based  on  fact 
is  no  longer  tenable,  and  they  adopt  instead  the  conglomeration  of  ideas, 
which  they  call  rational  Christology.  Why  do  they  catch  the  shadows  when 
the  substance  is  evaporated?  Because,  they  say,  the  ChHstian  mind  which 
historically  developed  those  dogmas,  must  necessarily  possess  the  ideas 
which  it  incarnated  in  supposed  facts ;  therefore  we  must  necessarily  build 
up  a  speculative  Christology.  But  the  Christian  mind  at  no  time  dealt 
with  ideals,  it  received  a  number  of  traditions  concerning  the  Messiah,  his 
natures,  offices  and  teachings,  verily  believed  to  be  facts  without  any  refer- 
ence to  any  idea.  So  the  acts  and  lessons  of  the  Apostles  were  again  re- 
ceived as  facts  and  not  as  a  presentation  of  ideas.  All  that  Christian  students 


—  123  — 

did  in  this  direction  was  to  harmonize  those  contradictory  traditions  and 
cast  them  into  dogmas,  which  the  populace  believed  and  the  philosophers 
attempted  to  expound.  But  if  those  traditions  are  not  facts,  where  is  the 
necessity  of  harmonizing  them,  hence  where  is  the  substance,  the  truth  or 
the  necessity  of  that  so-called  rational  Christology? 

If  they  maintain  that  they  must  stop  somewhere,  at  some  standing-point 
from  which  to  develop  a  system  of  Christianity,  therefore,  they  stop  at  the 
ideas  incorporated  in  the  orthodox  Christology,  as  the  legacy  of  the  past, 
upon  which  the  present  state  of  the  popular  mind  is  based ;  they  tell  the 
truth,  but  must  admit  at  the  same  time  that  the  popular  mind  being  taken 
away  from  those  facts  to  the  ideas  thereof,  will  necessarily  be  prepared  to 
drop  the  ideas  as  well  as  the  facts,  which  will  be  the  end  of  that  so-called 
rational  Christology.  What  will  remain  then?  Either  the  return  into 
the  mediaeval  dogmatic  speculations  in  alleged  facts,  or  a  simple  return  to 
the  Sinaic  revelation  and  the  covenant,  the  standpoint  upon  which  Jesus 
and  his  Apostles  stood  together  with  the  primitive  Christians,  or  atheism 
and  immorality,  if  the  philosophers  do  not  succeed  better  in  the  future  than 
they  did  in  the  past  by  giving  us  a  Living  God  and  a  living  moral  law, 
living  arid  enlivening,  convincing  and  assuring.  The  law  of  evolution  can 
make  no  positive  religion. 

If  the  last  phases  of  Christian  reformation  offer  correct  material  from 
which  to  predict  the  future,  we  know  exactly  the  creed  of  the  future  man. 
In  the  past  it  was  not  the  Talmud  of  the  Jews  nor  the  Talmud  of 
the  Christians,  nor  the  wrangling  of  the  reformers  against  both  of 
them,  nor  any  other  phase,  form  or  method  which  the  law  of  evolution 
produced,  that  advanced  the  human  family  from  crude  and  childish 
notions  of  God  and  His  will  to  our  present  conceptions  of  both.  It  was 
neither  Rabbinism  and  Kabbalism  nor  the  Christology  of  the  orthodox 
or  the  dissenters,  all  of  which  were  mere  means  to  lead  man  to  God 
and  human  duty,  which  civilized  and  humanized  the  masses.  It  was  the 
substance  of  the  Sinaic  revelation  as  the  acknowledged  law  of  God,  and 
the  consciousness  of  His  covenant  of  love  with  His  children,  which  was 
spread  by  these  or  those  means ;  it  was  that  and  nothing  else  which  elevated 
man  to  the  dignity  of  a  child  of  God,  and  pointed  out  for  him  the  path 
leading  to  the  Father's  house.  This  revelation  and  this  covenant,  spread 
by  those  and  other  means,  were  the  redeeming  power  in  Christendom.  The 
means  are  the  form.  It  is  broken.  The  essence  remains.  On  this  plat- 
form we  meet  again.  "  The  grass  withereth,  the  flower  fadeth,  and  the 
word  of  our  God  lasteth  forever." 

THE  END. 


Copyright,  1883,  LEO  WISE  &  CO. 


CONTENTS. 


NO    OF  LECTUKK.  PAGE. 

I.     AGREEMENTS,  3 

II.     INSPIRATION,  PROPHECY  AND  REVELATION,  10 

III.  PROPHECY,  REVELATION  AND  THE  BIBLE,  16 

IV.  THE  JEWISH  AND  THE  CHRISTIAN  EVIDENCES  OF 
REVELATION  COMPARED,  23 

V.     THE  LAWS  OF  MOSES  AND  THE  LAWS  OF  PROGRESS,  28 
VI.     THE  HIGHEST  AUTHORITY  AFTER  REVELATION,  35 
VII.     SINAI  AND  CALVARY  COMPARED  FROM  THE  ETH- 
ICAL STANDPOINT,  42 
VIII.     FREEDOM,  THE  POSTULATE  OF  ETHICS,  49 
IX.     PROVIDENCE  AND  THE  DOGMA,  56 
X.     SIN  AND  ATONEMENT,  63 
XI.     IMMORTALITY  AND  SINAI,  70 
XII.     A  RESUME  OF  THE  BODY  OF  THE  DOCTRINE,  77 

XIII.  PARADISE,  HELL,  SATAN,  EVIL  SPIRITS  OR  RECOM- 
PENSE, 84 

XIV.  I. — GIFTS  OF  GRACE,  REDEMPTION  AND  SALVATION,  91 
XV.     II. — GIFTS  OF    GRACE,    REDEMPTION  AND  SALVA- 
TION, 98 

XVI.     I. — THE  JUDAISM  OF  HISTORY,  -  104 

XVII.     II. — THE  JUDAISM  OF  HISTORY,  in 

XVIII.     THE  CHRISTIANITY  OF  HISTORY,  -  117 


I. 


THE  AMERICAN  ISRAELITE. 

A   WEEKLY    ENGLISH    PERIODICAL. 

PUBLISHED  EVEEY   FBIDAY. 

REV.  DR.  ISAAC  M.  WISE,     -----     Editor. 
LEO  WISE  &  Co.,  -------       Publishers. 

THE  AMERICAN  ISRAELITE  is  a  rational  expounder  of  Jew 
ish  principles,  a  judicious  cultivator  of  Jewish  interests,  a  vig- 
orous advocate  of  Jewish  rights,  and  a  wide-awake  chronicler 
of  events  in  Israel  and  concerning  Israelites  both  at  home  and 
abroad.     PRICE,  per  annum,  $4.00. 


3fQOC   9JI.    2®ife,    gKlebactei^.  SCO.  9BtfC  & 


@tne   iiibtfd)  =  amertfamfdje  §amilien=3ettung. 

(Srjdjeint  teodfyentttcb,  unb  bringt  33elefc,renbe§  unb  tlnter^altenbe§  aue  bent  jiibifd>en 
Seben. 

i§,  $2.00  per  Safyr.     "American  Israelite"  u.  ,,2)ebora^,"  So.On. 


THE  SABBATH  VISITOR, 

'PUBLISHED  BY  BLOCK  &  CO. 

This  paper  is  issued  weekly,  and  handsomely  gotten  up; 
is  devoted  to  the  interests  of  our  rising  Young  [srael  through- 
out the  land. 

Subscription  only  ONE  DOLLAR  AND  TWENTY  CENTS  ($1.20), 
for  twelve  months,  including  postage. 

Special  arrangements  made  with  Sabbath-schools. 


II. 


BOOKS  BY  REV.  DR.  ISAAC  M.  WISE, 


PRESIDENT  OF  THE  HEBREW  UNION  COLLEGE. 


History  of  the  Hebrews'  Second  Commonwealth  : 

With  special  reference  to  its  Literature,  Culture,  and  the 
Origin  of  Rabbinism  and  Christianity. 

This  volume  contains  a  compact  narrative  of  Hebrew  history 
from  536  before  to  70  after  the  Christian  era,  divided  into  Periods 
and  Chapters,  and  subdivided  into  Paragraphs,  in  a  manner 
which  decidedly  assists  the  rnemor}*  and  makes  reading  easy 
and  pleasant. 

The  book  claims  to  be  the  first  of  its  kind,  written  from  a 
democratic,  free  and  purely  scientific  standpoint,  without  refer- 
ence to  political  or  religious  preferences  and  considerations; 
also  without  any  mysticism  or  supernaturalism  to  tincture  the 
facts.  It  is  history  without  miracles;  history  constructed  on 
the  law  of  causality,  where  every  event  appears  as  the  natural 
consequence  of  its  preceding  ones.  It  claims  to  be  history  and 
the  first  of  its  kind  in  this  particular  chapter  thereof.  It  is 
written  for  students  as  well  as  for  the  general  reader. 

BOUND  IN  CLOTH,  $2  00 

BOUND  IN  CLOTH,  Gilt  Edge,  -  2  50 

MOROCCO,  Full  Gilt,  3  00 

Judaism,  Its  Doctrines  and  Duties. 

The  most  complete  and  concise  compendium  of  Judaism, 
from  the  rational  standpoint. 
PRICE,        -  $    60 


III. 

The  Martyrdom  of  Jesus  of  Nazareth. 

Which  tells  all  about  Christianity  and  the  credibility  of  the 
Gospel  story  in  a  spirit  of  veracity  and  honest  argument  in  a 
concise  and  clear  style.  It  tells  that  Jesus  did  not  establish 
any  sacraments ;  that  he  died  to  save  the  lives  of  his  disciples  ; 
that  he  was  not  tried  before  any  Jewish  authority ;  that  it  is 
not  certain  that  he  was  crucified;  that  if  it  is  certain  that  he 
was  crucified,  that  the  Romans,  and  not  the  Jews,  did  it. 

PAPER  COVER,  -      $    75 

BOUND  IN  CLOTH,  1  00 

The  Cosmic  God. 

A  Philosophical  conciliation  of  Religion  and  Science.  A  book 
for  thinkers  and  students. 
CLOTH  BINDING,  -  SI  50 

Three  Lectures  on  the  Origin  of  Christianity. 

I. — Jesus  the  Pharisee. 
II. — The  Apostles  and  the  Essenes. 
III. — Paul  and  the  Mystics. 
FOR  THE  THREE  LECTURES.  8     35 

The  Wandering  Jew. 

The  -Jew   of  History  as  contrasted  with  the  Jew  of  Fiction. 
The  part  Israel  has  played  in  the  World's  Civilization,  briefly 
pictured. 
PRICE,  $    -_>5 

Moses :  The  Man  and  Statesman. 

A  Lecture. 
PRICE.  $    25 

ADDRESS  ORDERS  TO 

LEO  WISE  &  CO., 

CINCINNATI,  OHIO. 


UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA  LIBRARY 

Los  Angeles 
This  book  is  DUE  on  the  last  date  stamped  below. 


^y:A      LOAN  DESK 


AHR131965 


PLEASE  DO   NOT    REMOVE 


THIS    BOOK  CARD 


University  Research  Library 


